W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Latest iteration of RDF Datatyping WD (ship it!)

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 10:07:19 +0200
To: "Pat Hayes <phayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: ""Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF9C109D41.C5B25A98-ONC1256B9D.002C4493@agfa.be>


>>this sounds like a union...
>>and I don't see that as explained in
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Mar/0151.html
>>and as I still think we should have
>>   rdfd:range rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:range .
>
>I would not recommend that. That would re-introduce all the
>range-inheritance problems assocaited with datatyping. The basic idea
>of the current proposal is to keep range-assignment (ie rdfs:Range)
>and datatyping (rdfd:Range) quite separate, so you can have either
>one without the other (or both if you choose to). That is the only
>way I can see to allow the kind of Dublin-Core sloppiness in a
>rational framework.

agreed, we currently have something like

  http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfd-rules.n3

and a testcase like

( <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p7.nt>
  <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p7s.nt>
  <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
  <http://www.w3.org/2002/rdf-datatyping#> )
  log:entails
  <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p8.nt> .

--
Jos
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 04:28:17 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:28 EDT