- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 17:30:29 +0000
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
>>>Graham Klyne said: > > My apologies if this has already been discussed. > > Is it intended that the syntax provide a way to describe a list that > contains literals? No. > If so, how does that work? > > If not, that seems like a significant omission, that significantly limits > the utility of the new list construct. I suppose one can always write out > the list "longhand" with rdf:List, rdf:first, rdf:rest and rdf:nil. As you know very well, rdf:parseType="Collection" was asked of RDF Core, by WebONT to work the same way as daml:Collection. The latter always, and only, allowed a collection of nodes to be listed as content. It is not a significant omission at all since you can always list any triples you want; it is (yet another) abbreviation for triples. Dave
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 12:33:00 UTC