At 22:28 20/03/2002 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote: [...] >Oh... but more substantively: >the hassle of dealing with an infinite number >of rdf:_1 rdf:_2 things. Hmmm. Its been proposed we make all those subproperties of some common super property, e.g. rdf:member. Is there anything we are likely to want to say about any rdf:_nnn that is not true of rdfs:member. Would that deal with this, or am I missing the point? BrianReceived on Thursday, 21 March 2002 08:44:34 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:20 EDT