- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 28 Jan 2002 15:08:17 -0600
- To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 10:03, Jonathan Borden wrote: > The proposal is to make a small change to the current RDF syntax and allow > an rdf:ID attribute on the rdf:RDF element. interesting idea... devious, even! TimBL, (with your director hat off) I wonder if this would be an acceptable alternative to log:quote for serializing formulas? (the ideal affirmative answer is running code, of course ;-) > Perhaps this might be acceptably in scope for the current RDF WG. > > Regarding: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jan/0350.html > > Nested contexts can be encoded: > > <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="..."> > <rdf:RDF rdf:ID="#nest"> > ... > </rdf:RDF> > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#nest"> > ... > </rdf:Description> > </rdf:RDF> > > alternatively: > > <rdf:RDF> > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#jonb"> > <log:asserts> > <rdf:RDF> > .... nested context > </rdf:RDF> > </log:asserts> > </rdf:Description> > </rdf:RDF> > > since it isn't entirely clear to me when RDF embedded within for example > XHTML is intended to be asserted the issue of when the contents of a nested > context (rdf:RDF element) are intended to be 'asserted' should be clarified. > (I am providing this request for clarification as 'wiggle room' in the hope > that it will bring the issue in-scope) > > Jonathan > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 16:09:17 UTC