xml-dev - Re: The RDF model *is* part of the problem

[james anderson <james.anderson@mecomnet.de>]

The problem would arise in OOP forms where namespace structure is
orthogonal to class structure. CLOS, for instance, is a oo-language in
which slot inheritance is governed by rules for identifying names which
are independant of the class inheritance structure. Names (symbols) are
in packages and inheritance relations may be constructed among packages
without regard to where the names appear.

One example of where the problem could appear would be in a graphics
system in which the behavior of a given instance is composed of that of
a number of independent super-classes. Where, for whatever reason, one
does not wish to accomplish something similar with delegation, and one
cannot presume a common super-class, each of the pertinent superclasses
is going to include a method which references the same property
indepently declared. For example, the graphics context. 

Nb. in a situation analogous to the java slot visibility rules, the CLOS
slot typing rules run afoul of the rdf notion of properties, ...

Stefan Haustein wrote:
> 
> james anderson wrote:
> > ...
> > 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.
> 
> Can you give a relevant example of this kind of OOP?

...


***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************