Re: Spec doesn't talk about two-valued relationships

Has the lack of a recommended practice in the core RDF specifications,
for representing unary predicates caused problems for anyone?  Also,
what approaches have been used for representing unary predicates?

Brian

Aaron Swartz wrote:
> 
> The spec explains how to deal with relationships > 3 (rdf:value) but not
> those < 3 (i.e. two). I'd like to suggest we introduce two new properties:
> 
> rdf:is
> rdf:isNot
> 
> This saves us from having to do something klugey like:
> 
> <http://www.aaronsw.com/> bob:likesChocolate 0 .
> 
> and also allows RDF processors to know that it's part of two-valued logic
> and treat it properly.
> 
> --
> Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>|       The Info Network
>   <http://www.aaronsw.com>   |     <http://theinfo.org>
> AIM: JediOfPi | ICQ: 33158237| the way you want the web to be