W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > May 2001

Re: Alternative RDF Syntaxes (n3, ...)

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:20:15 +0100
Message-ID: <02e001c0dfae$30dbf940$17d993c3@z5n9x1>
To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> My code uses the interpretation that { <a> <b> <c>.
> <d> <e> <f>. } denotes a set which has an enumeration
> which is a DAML list of two elements which are
> rdf:Statements, as given.

I interpret:-

   { :a :b :c . :x :y :z }

as

   [ a n3:Context;
      rdf:_1 [ a rdf:Statement;
        rdf:subject :a;
        rdf:predicate :b;
        rdf:object :c ];
      rdf:_2 [ a rdf:Statement;
        rdf:subject :x;
        rdf:predicate :y;
        rdf:object :z ] ] .

But that's just me :-) Whaddya mean by a set which has two
ennumerations? So a oneOf nodelist?

[ daml:oneOf ([ a rdf:Statement;
        rdf:subject :a;
        rdf:predicate :b;
        rdf:object :c ]
    [ a rdf:Statement;
        rdf:subject :x;
        rdf:predicate :y;
        rdf:object :z ]) ] .

???

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 12:09:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:45:37 UTC