Oops - my mistake - I withdraw my objection. Jeremy > -----Original Message----- > From: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com > [mailto:jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com] > Sent: 24 September 2001 15:52 > To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com > Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: RDFS rule 0 > > > > Jeremy, > > > I had taken the position of the WG as being agnosticism as to whether > > Literals is-a-subset-of Resources or not. > > that is indeed true, and I think the current MT is > reflecting that position: > ------------------------------------------------------- > | 1c | xxx aaa uuu. | uuu rdf:type rdfs:Resource. | > ------------------------------------------------------- > where > uuu for any uriref or bNode (but not a literal). > so 1c does,t apply for LV (and I had to know that > and not cause the confusion with 0c, but I was > biased by my implementation problerms,...) > > -- > Jos > >Received on Monday, 24 September 2001 10:02:11 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:39:49 EDT