Re: [xdi] InnerRoots - XDI Wiki

[Joseph Boyle <planetwork@josephboyle.net>]

In this example the shorthand form =a/+b/(=x/+y/=z) doesn't use the inner root notation, the expanded form does. So this does not seem like a justification for having inner root syntax as a shorthand.

What benefit do we get from supporting the inner root syntax? Is it to avoid repetition of a prefix in both subject and object?

On May 4, 2013, at 9:32 AM, Markus Sabadello <markus.sabadello@gmail.com> wrote

> Yes I think you could call it a prefix in the same sense as the address of any context node becomes a prefix of all its child context nodes.
> 
> The only "special" thing about an inner root is that its address is composed of the address of another, unrelated context node, plus a relational arc.
> 
> Example:
> 
> You have context node =a
> You have relational arc +b
> The address of the target context node of the relational arc is (=a/+b)  <--- That's the inner root.
> 
> Then underneath that inner root you could have a statement such as the following:
> 
> (=a/+b)=x/+y/(=a/+b)=z
> 
> Which in its shorthand form would be:
> 
> =a/+b/(=x/+y/=z)
> 
> So yes you could call (=a/+b) a prefix, but again, every context address is a prefix to its child context addresses.
> 
> Markus
> 
> On 03.05.2013 17:11, Joseph Boyle wrote:
>> Last time we had a discussion of the meaning of inner roots, where I observed they can be interpreted as a common prefix to be prefixed to both the subject and object. Is this (one) valid interpretation?
>> 
>> https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/InnerRoots
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>> 
>