OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: The RDF model *is* part of the problem

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: james anderson <james.anderson@mecomnet.de>
  • To: xml-dev@xml.org
  • Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 18:29:09 +0100

while it is correct, that, in oop, the scope and extent of property
bindings relate to object boundaries and relations, the identity of the
name is not necessarily qualified by the class. there are other oop
forms for which the expressiveness of rdf is necessary. java is not the
only possibility.

the "work-around" of "additional" namespaces is, well, the nature of the
namespaces which java, in particular, prescribes. if rdf were to enforce
these restrictions itself, then other oop forms wouldn't be serializable
at all.

Stefan Haustein wrote:
> ...
> In RDF schema, property names are global. In OOP, object
> properties are local to the defining class/interface.
> Thus, I would need to add the class name to the property
> name in order to avoid possible problems with name
> conflicst. I also could assign a new namespace to each
> interface or class. But both alternatives make the RDF
> code very ugly...

This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS