W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: RDF Issue rdfs-primitive-properties

From: Wolfgang Nejdl <nejdl@kbs.uni-hannover.de>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:47:06 +0100
Message-Id: <200111181547.fAIFl7P02049@mahler.kbs.uni-hannover.de>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
cc: nejdl@kbs.uni-hannover.de, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
> Wolfgang,
> 
> In
> 
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2000AprJun/0041.html
> 
> you raised an issue with the RDF Schema candidate recommendation which was 
> captured in
> 
>    http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-primitive-properties
> 
> as
> 
> [[[
> 
> Summary: The submitter suggests that the properties rdfs:subClassOf, 
> rdf:type, rdfs:domain and rdfs:range should not be defined as instances of 
> rdf:Property, but should instead be primitive. It is contended that rdf 
> would then be less self referential and easier to understand.
> 
> ]]]
> 
> The RDFCore WG carefully considered this suggestion, but decided not to 
> proceed with it, on the grounds that no problem with the current proposal 
> had been identified.  This decision is documented in:
> 
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20010801-f2f/#decisions
> 
> Please could you reply to this message, copying www-rdf-comments, 
> indicating whether this is an acceptable resolution of this issue.
> 

Thanks for this question. Yes, I consider this issue settled in a
meaningful way. The current MT resolves this issue nicely, and we have
actually used the same approach in our O-Telos-RDF extension.

Wolfgang

> Brian McBride
> RDFCore co-chair
Received on Sunday, 18 November 2001 10:47:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:29 GMT