Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Rick JELLIFFE wrote: > * The "Formal Grammar" productions are not complete. The allowed > attributes rdf:value is not specified anywhere: actually, it is mentioned in > the RDF Schema spec, but that only give a references to s.2.3 in the RDF spec > which just points to an example. rdf:value is just like any other property, and is handled as such. > > * The RDF spec seems to treat attributes and elements interchangeably: > sometimes we get rdf:type attribute, sometimes we get rdf:type element. The > pupported "complete BNF for RDF" only gives the attribute form. Not so. > This slackness comes from not using a DTDs or any other schema framework which > would have allowed their formal specs to have been tested by a generic tool. DTDs aren't general enough to handle RDF, with its ability to include arbitrary child elements and arbitrary attributes, especially the latter. -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@r...> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer) *************************************************************************** This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers. To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html ***************************************************************************
|
