W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > July 2007

Re: [RDFa] ISSUE-3 @class and @role for rdf:type

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 14:52:29 +0200
To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net, "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tuzspromsmjzpq@acer3010.lan>

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 13:26:30 +0200, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>  

> My argument has always been that something 'playing the role of x', is
> not the same as 'something being x', and so @role should not represent
> rdf:type.

I've never understood this argument, which seems to be based on what  
things mean in English. Something "being of class X" is also not the same  
as "something being X". But so what? The question is about the mapping to  

Received on Thursday, 5 July 2007 12:52:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:23 UTC