- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 13 Nov 2002 13:20:37 -0600
- To: www-archive@w3.org
- Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
This regards... "ACTION: 5.5 list syntax or semantics in RDF CORE, Semantic Web Coordination (Dan Connolly) " -- WebOnt minutes 7Nov http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0119.html I'm not sure exactly who should answer this question, but in order to be able to refer to it from varios fora, I'm sending it to www-archive... The WebOnt WG has an issue on lists... http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.5-List-syntax-or-semantics and so does RDF core... http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-seq-representation RDF core decided to add Collection/first/rest syntax back in May, but leaned away from specifying semantics like "all lists exist" and "each list can only have one first" and "nothing is in the nil list". Recent WebOnt semantics drafts supply those semantics. Is this OK? (a) yes. anybody can say anything about anything, so it doesn't matter what WebOnt says about rdf:first (b) yes; what WebOnt says about rdf:first is *consistent* with what RDF core says about rdf:first, and it's OK for higher layers to constrain what lower layers specify. (c) yes; what WebOnt says about rdf:first is exactly what RDF Core means; RDF Core just doesn't have formal mechanisms to say it. WebOnt has FunctionalProperty and such, so it's fine for them to formalize these things. (d) no; what WebOnt says about lists conflicts with what RDF Core says about lists. [I'd consider this a bug, but there has been a sufficiently large email blizzard around this stuff that I think it would be worth the CG's time to make sure this doesn't happen.] (e) no; WebOnt can't change what RDF Core says about lists, period; not even to refine/constrain/formalize it in a way that's consistent with what RDF Core said. (f) yes; WebOnt can change what RDF Core says about lists because it's part of W3C, and W3C owns the rdf namespace. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2002 14:21:10 UTC