- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:14:09 -0500 (EST)
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> Subject: Re: Guide: Legal syntax? Date: 29 Oct 2002 16:02:50 -0600 > On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 12:38, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > From: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com> > > Subject: RE: Guide: Legal syntax? > > Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:14:35 -0600 > > > > > Agreed. Will use Peter's prefered version, modified to use 'about'. > > > > Is there really (still) a single-ID requirement? > > I believe so; the test cases editor's draft agrees: > > "Issue: rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about has 2 tests" > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about/error1.rdf > -- http://www.w3.org/2001/08/rdf-test/ > > > I see wording to that could be interpreted to have this effect in the new > > syntax document. > > I'm not sure which one you mean; I haven't been following that one > very closely... > > > However, the wording is, in my opinion, very poorly > > written, so much so that interpreting it as a single-ID requirement > > requires knowing that there is such a requirement. > > The test case makes it pretty clear to me. If you can > think of ways to improve the syntax document, please > send them to www-rdf-comments. [...] The wording in question is: > 5.15 Production idAttr > > attribute(URI = rdf:ID, string-value=rdf-id) > > Constraint: The names used as values of rdf:ID and rdf:bagID attributes > must be unique in a single RDF/XML document since they come from the same > set of names. This applies with respect to the in-scope base-uri property > of the current element; so the same value can appear on different elements > in the same document but only if the in-scope base-uri values were > different. > > Test: Indicated by test014.rdf and test014.nt Which doesn't even reference the test you mention. peter
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 17:14:19 UTC