- From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:36:05 +0000
- To: Gabe Beged-Dov <begeddov@jfinity.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Interest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
At 09:53 PM 11/28/00 -0800, Gabe Beged-Dov wrote: >This seems like an interesting work-around but the spec goes to alot >of trouble to limit the bags that occur in a document to be scoped by >that document. The grammar disallows bags from having an "about" >attribute . Oooh, so it does! I missed that. Dan: should this be on the issues list? Is there any reason not to be able to make statements about bags that are defined elsewhere? Looking at this, I realize the RDF M&S syntax is actually ambiguous. Consider: <rdf:Bag> <li>foo</li> </rdf:Bag> This matches syntax productions [20] and [17]. >The issue of how to handle containers is a big one that we'll probably >revisit many times till we figure out how to handle it. I don't like >the RDF style containers but I don't see an easy way to avoid them >since they are so woven into the spec. In one sense, that's true, but I think it is also possible to simply ignore that part of the spec and build similar structures without actually breaking RDF. It's sneaky, but I don't think there's anything in RDF to prohibit that (which is effectively what I done with my contexts proposals). #g ------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2000 12:32:59 UTC