- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 10:25:28 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>I'm a little unclear on proposal C... in >particular, what does it say about what >folks can put in schemas to constrain >an age propoerty to be/look-like decimals? > > >The 6Sep minutes >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0081.html >cite a 29Aug proposal >http://www-nrc.nokia.com/sw/rdf-datatyping.html >which says "The RDF class extension of an rdfs:Datatype >is its value space." > >I want to be sure that whatever spec we come up with, >I can continue to use the datatype property idiom... > <k:Thursday r:about="#_thu10"> > <dt:date>2002-10-10</dt:date> > </k:Thursday> > -- http://www.w3.org/2002/10dc-uk/itin3.rdf > >So far, our (published WD) specs have been consistent >with a view that classes and properties are disjoint. (In >SWAD, we use that assumption for lint-style checking.) >The 6Sep decision seems to conflict with the >use of the datatype property idioim under >the disjointness-of-properties-and-classes >assumption. I was not aware that there was any such assumption. On the contrary, in fact: the MT has been designed to allow the possibility of a class and a property being the same. If this is an assumption, maybe we should reflect it formally in the language. Certainly that would make the Webont work a little simpler. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:25:25 UTC