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

RE: Answer to the question: What is a "value" to RDF

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 17:31:50 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011117173025.043f1ec0@joy.songbird.com>
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com, melnik@db.stanford.edu, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Jos,

I'm almost happy with this idiom, except that I think it will be confusing 
to use XML schema datatype URIs as properties.  See my other message to Pat.

#g
--

At 10:43 PM 11/16/01 +0100, jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote:

>[...]
> >
> > Am I the only one to see a conflict here? (though that may
> > not be so surprising ;-)
> >
> > I.e. what is the interpretation of the following knowledge:
> >
> >    x s:age "P12Y" .
> >    s:age rdfs:range xsd:duration .
> >    s:age rdfs:subPropertyOf xsd:duration .
> >
> > According to the S proposal, either range or subproperty
> > relations can define type. Which is it going to be? Both?!
>
>
>I think that in the S-idiom it is (just)
>
>   x s:age [ xsd:duration "P12Y"] .
>
>and
>   s:age rdfs:range [ is rdfs:domain of xsd:duration ] .
>
>and
>   xsd:duration rdfs:range [ is rdfs:domain of xsd:string ] .
>
>(datatypes in the S-idiom are properties, that S-imple ;-)
>
>--
>Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
       __
      /\ \
     /  \ \
    / /\ \ \
   / / /\ \ \
  / / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Saturday, 17 November 2001 13:50:19 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:42:45 EDT