• To: "John Cowan" <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: RE: RDF : Headless Triples syntax
• From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>
• Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 20:43:13 +0100
• Cc: "Xml-Dev" <xml-dev@l...>,"RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200211171836.NAA09607@m...>

>Your rdf:D element is the same as rdf:Description, with an implied
>rdf:about
>attribute whose value is "".

Thanks John, I should have made that clear myself ;-)

I can understand the need for an <rdf:RDF> wall around embedded RDF in the
current syntax (to keep its Gothic structure out of sight). If however the
RDF was restricted to (decapitated) one-layer statements, I reckon an
<rdf:D> ha-ha is adequate.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDF : Headless Triples syntax
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: RDF : Headless Triples syntax
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: more QName madness
• Next by Date: RE: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic systems
• Previous by thread: Re: RDF : Headless Triples syntax
• Next by thread: Re: RDF : Headless Triples syntax
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread