W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2001

Re: F2F action point 2001-08-02#10 and issue rdfs-constraining-containers

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:05:58 +0100 (BST)
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
cc: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0108231400020.16769-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Brian McBride wrote:

>
>
> Jan Grant wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > The message that started this thread actually referred to the AP at
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20010801-f2f/2001-08-02.html#T19-16-18
> > (which I don't think made the minutes...?)
>
> Hmmm.  Yes, I've got a problem reconciling the notes from the on screen
> document.
>
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20010801-f2f/ericsdoc.txt
>
> and the logs
>
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20010801-f2f/2001-08-02.html#T19-15-15
>
> The on screen document makes no mention of the action to describe how to
> add to RDFS and says that we expect higher layer languages to handle this
> problem, in which case I'm not sure we would have asked Jan to figure
> out how to add it (I presume to RDFS).
>
> This also links up with Aaron's suggestion that we should show how this
> can be done with DAML+OIL.
>
> Can anyone help clarify?
>
> As its in the log, I've added to the minutes, an action on Jan  to provide
> an explanation of how sub-classing containers could be added to RDF Schema.
> We can consider at the telecon whether this is in fact the right action.

What happened (as I recall it*):


The conversation had previously mentioned punting class-contextualised
constraints to web-ont.

We moved onto strong typing for container subclasses.

Danbri said there hadn't been much call for this; at least, nobody
seemed to be making huge noises about missing it (although everyone
seemed to think it would be nice).

At which point I piped up to say that you got it for free with the
c-cont.constr.s if you included one small addition (a superproperty to
the "rdf:_n"s).

Brian asked me to summarise to the list the details of this, which is
what I sent in that message that spawned this thread (citing the wrong
action point by mistake).

We then closed the issue since we're not looking at adding this to RDFS
and I was expecting a pointer to my message as a "where this will
come from in future work" addendum to the issue.



jan

* those who know me know how reliable this isn't :-)

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
ioctl(2): probably the coolest Unix system call in the world
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2001 09:08:07 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:48 EDT