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

Re: missing (and incorrect) RDFS axioms

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 21:34:08 +0100
To: "Dan Connolly <connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, fmanola@attbi.com, "Peter F. "Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFC7EC4992.EF8F4717-ONC1256C6B.006F12B3-C1256C6B.0071079F@agfa.be>


> > > rdf:object          rdfs:range  rdfs:Resource .                   *
> >
> > ...did we agree that all literals are resources?

well, it's in the current MT draft
rdfs:Literal rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Resource .
(and I, for one, strongly agree)

> regardless, it's redundant to say range Resource.
> Please let's don't.

I agree and try to avoid it in
http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules
(which is still in a web with owl)

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 8 November 2002 15:34:56 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:01 EDT