- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 23 Apr 2002 14:40:42 -0500
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Tue, 2002-04-23 at 14:29, Pat Hayes wrote: > >On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 17:35, Pat Hayes wrote: > >> >[...] > >> >> Now this works perfectly well* when the oneOf claim > >> >> is spelled out long-hand using first/rest/nil. > >> > >> [To Dan:] > >> Well, that isn't clear. > > > >Sigh... I should have known better than to make that claim > >without working out the details... > > > >> After all, it is RDF-legal to add some other > >> rest/first/rest chains to the same bnodes, > > > >Well, first and rest are UniqueProperties. > > There isn't any such notion in RDF. Not yet; but I say, again: |So the next proposal is: | | * add parseType="collection" to RDF/xml; | | * add rdf:first, rdf:rest, rdf:nil too. | | * specify that parseType="collection" | | is notation for first/rest/nil triples | ala daml:collection. By 'ala daml:collection' I meant: including the fact that first/rest are functional. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2002 15:40:42 UTC