W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

"asserted triple" weasle-words must go [was: best way to write triples?]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 17 Apr 2002 18:30:21 -0500
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1019086222.4817.152.camel@dirk>
On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 18:04, Pat Hayes wrote:

> I ask now because I would like to get it right in what might be the 
> final version of the MT document.

Ah... then about this bit:

The use of the phrase "asserted triple" in the third condition is a
deliberate weasel-worded artifact, intended to allow an RDF graph or
document to contain triples which are being used for some
non-assertional purpose. 
  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-mt-20020214/

I suggest it's time to get rid of the weasle-words.

The most straightforward thing to do is to strike that text.
That's my preference.

Otherwise, let's see some test cases for what it means.

One option is to resurrect the magic-namespace from M&S 1.0.

When an RDF processor encounters an XML element or attribute name that
is declared to be from a namespace whose name begins with the string
"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax" and the processor does not
recognize the semantics of that name then the processor is required to
skip (i.e., generate no tuples for) the entire XML element, including
its content, whose name is unrecognized or that has an attribute whose
name is unrecognized.
  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222

This would reverse our earlier (30th November 2001) decision
re para 196:

  The WG decided to delete the effect of this text from
  the specification. There is no special processing of elements
  from the namespace whose URI
  is http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax.

   -- http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2002 19:30:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:12 UTC