- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 15:33:02 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 13:38 18/09/2002 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote: >Brian, > >http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-containers-otherapproaches > >Since this issue was closed as "this issue is out of scope for this WG" I >note that we have since decided to include a list facility along the lines >suggested: > >http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-seq-representation > >Should first issue resolution be updated? I've been thinking not. We decided to include support for a daml:collection like list structure. The question of alternative designs for contains is more general. A future WG may consider this more general question and conclude that with parseType="Collection" no more is needed, or they may conclude otherwise. That just seems like territory we have decided not to consider and in the interests of getting done I'm inclined to leave it that way. Thoughts? Brian
Received on Thursday, 19 September 2002 10:35:28 UTC