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

Re: draft question: option C

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 17:41:14 +0200
To: "pat hayes <phayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFD2B2092A.1F978B73-ONC1256C53.0055F3E5-C1256C53.00562EED@agfa.be>


[...]

>>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.

i think it's good to have it as in the current MT

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:41:59 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:26 EDT