Re: Issue rdfms-abouteach

>>>Dan Brickley said:
> Thanks Patrick; much appreciated. Something we could do next, *if* we do
> decide to remove the construct from our next Working Draft, is propagate
> this up to the Semantic Web Coordination Group and ask that the Web
> Ontology WG take this (ie. some improved/equivalent functionality) on
> board as a design requirement or use case for their Web Ontology language.

I'd support and recommend that.  As I was probably hinting but not
saying clear enough, aboutEach really looks much better as a concept
on top of RDF, more in the rules area.

Dave