Re: rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr

I like this proposal.

#g
--

At 02:48 PM 1/9/02 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote:


>Given that I objected to the proposed resolution of this issue at the last
>meeting I have been asked to provide an alternative resolution.
>
>
>My proposal:
>
>   An rdf:ID attribute is permissable on all property elements and always
>refers to the resource that is the reification of the triple corresponding
>to that property element.
>
>
>
>Notes:
>   - this allows rdf:ID and rdf:resource on the same property element which
>is a change.
>   - this favours a reading of the relevant contradiction in M&S in which
>para232 is dropped and para214 is preferred.
>
>Reasons for this are:
>  - M&S is contradictory and has widely varying implementations of its
>reification syntax.
>  - This WG must resolve the contradiction.
>  - My proposed resolution is very simple, and hence makes reification
>significantly more usable, and less of a barrier to RDF take-up.
>
>More detail in:
>
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0365.html
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0374.html
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0381.html
>
>I will post a follow-up with some implementation details.
>
>Jeremy

------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
        __
       /\ \
      /  \ \
     / /\ \ \
    / / /\ \ \
   / / /__\_\ \
  / / /________\
  \/___________/

Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2002 12:06:00 UTC