- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:45:53 +0100
- To: Oliver Lyttleton <olyttlet@computing.dcu.ie>
- cc: www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
>>>Oliver Lyttleton said: > The formal grammar for RDF (see www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax) indicates > that a container cannot be a child element of a property element. > Therefore, RDF statements like this are illegal, no?: > > > <books> > <rdf:Bag> > <rdf:_1 resource="Matilda"/> > <rdf:_2 resource="The BFG"/> > </rdf:Bag> > </books> > > > Obviously, they're not, but according to the formal grammar, they are! > <snip/> That's one reason among many why about 1.5 years ago, we started updating the RDF specs and I edit the syntax draft. You can read the latest version at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar There is no real restriction on where you use RDF container (Seq, Bag, Alt) and properties off them, so the above is OK. It really always was, in practice. Dave
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 08:46:17 UTC