- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 23 Apr 2002 22:38:53 -0500
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Tue, 2002-04-23 at 17:41, Pat Hayes wrote: [...] > >By 'ala daml:collection' I meant: including > >the fact that first/rest are functional. > > > > Oh, I see. But then that is a much bigger change/extension to RDF > than it seems, since now RDF has a way to encode functional > properties. It's a big change, yes. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with it. The longhand-OK option is acceptable to me, but I dunno if it'll fly in the WebOnt WG and community. The other options, i.e. techniques for enhancing the <rdf:li> style collections to express closed lists (a) have to be at least as powerful as first/rest in order to get the job done (I think?), and (b) look uglier. > That goes beyond just adding a different kind of > container. I would like to explore what the other implications of > that might be. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2002 23:38:45 UTC