Jim, In the interests of keeping the Core small, I think we should simply say that specs SHOULD use existing methods for ordered properties if they apply. The RDF Schema spec defines two methods.
1. Containers - rdf:Seq - you would create a subclass of this and use the built-in properties rdf:_1, rdf:_2, etc. to relate the container to its ordered members. Containers are open, so they would not be right for things like argument lists. 2. Collections - these are like linked lists. They are closed and ordered. rdf:List, rdf:first, rdf:rest, rdf:nil Regards, ___________________________________________________________________________ Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management IBM Software, Rational Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063 Twitter | Facebook | YouTube From: James Conallen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 07/20/2010 01:26 PM Subject: [oslc-core] ordered properties Sent by: [email protected] In the section "Order of property values insignificant" it states that "providers MUST not place any significance on the ordering of property values in representations." Would it be appropriate to append to this some guidance on how ordering should be achieved (i.e. rdf:Seq)? Otherwise we might end up with many different ways to imply ordering. <jim/> jim conallen [email protected] Rational Software, IBM Software Group _______________________________________________ Oslc-Core mailing list [email protected] http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
