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 14:12:19 +0200
To: "Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: "ext Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>, "Pat Hayes <phayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, "RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFBDBC2B32.247D349A-ONC1256B9D.0042351F@agfa.be>


> I'm still wondering about the necessity of 2b. It's not
> quite as troublesome to me as e.g. inferring a datatype
> property idiom from an inline idiom, but I'm still not
> sure it is essential.
> Can you clarify for me what breaks if it is removed?

well, it's just that

  <http://example.org/dt#Jenny> <http://example.org/dt#age> _:z .
  _:z <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#number> "35" .

out of

( <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p7.nt>
  <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p7s.nt> )

seems ok to me
but it's not that something would break of course

> Also, if 2b is present, then 2a is unnecessary, since
> the rdf:type of ?o can then be inferred from the
> rdfs:domain of ?d.

right, ok, will do that

Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 08:27:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:57 UTC