- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 19:06:11 +0000
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net>
- Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Interesting idea. I think I like it (speaking for myself only). If rdf:ID
then also rdf:about should also be an option, I think.
#g
--
At 11:03 AM 1/28/02 -0500, 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.
>
>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
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
__
/\ \
/ \ \
/ /\ \ \
/ / /\ \ \
/ / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 16:37:14 UTC