Misleading note about extensibiity of Collection syntax

I think this is bogus:

"Note: The RDF Schema specification [RDFSCHEMA] also defines
a mechanism to declare additional subclasses of these container
types, in which case production [18] is extended to include the
names of those declared subclasses."

-- http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/#containers

For example, consider:


<rdfs:Class id="#MyContainer">


Is an RDF 1.0 parser expected to parse MyContainer
as a typednode or as a container? The note suggests
container... but suppose the statement that
MyContainer is a Container were in some document
linked from this one, and that document's source
was questionable, and I don't necessarily trust it.
Does the model I get from this document depend
on whether I trust some other document? I hope not.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Thursday, 3 August 2000 13:54:12 UTC