Russell Duhon wrote: > snip > Personally, I view RDF as more along > the lines of Python or similar important dynamic, strongly typed > languages -- we can play fast and loose with it in many ways, using > duck typing, but the types are still there to exploit when useful. > This seems like a reasonble position, except that being able to ignore the types when you want to makes them optional doesn't it? And playing fast and loose doesn't sound like what I recall of strong typing! --FrankReceived on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:26:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:36:09 GMT