- 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