Re: rdf:value and RDF Schema (was: typed containers in RDF Schema)

At 20:19 09/06/2002 -0700, Garret Wilson wrote:

[...]


>Well, let's say I have another work (urn:x-books:book2) that has the same
>dc:creator of urn:x-people:jane-doe---but in this case, Jane is the author,
>not the annotator. If the b-node above is the same as urn:x-people:jane-doe,
>then there's a big problem: Jane Doe would be listed as the annotator of
>urn:x-books:book2, even though she's the *author* of that work. That is,
>once a non-b-node Jane Doe gets an oebps:role, she *always* has that role.

Just so and I thought that was why you had structured things this way.  How 
then how do we think of the type of that b-node.  If we think of it as 
"person-in-role" and "person-in-role" is a subclass of person, then the 
range constraint of the creator property is maintained and that is 
fine.  But then the use of rdf:value, whilst not wrong, since RDF defines 
no formal semantics for it, doesn't quite feel right to me.  I'd have used 
a more specific property, e.g. person.

I'm not arguing that your modeling is wrong; at this stage I'm just trying 
to understand it.

Brian