Re: p3p rdf schema

  Sorry, I want to know why my approach is incorrect, or at least more
incorrect than yours.

  Could you explain me the last question you poped, because I didn't
understant it very well.

  Thanks again,
               Marc

Brian McBride writes:

> Hi Marc,
> 
> 
> At 15:25 04/02/2002 +0000, tarod@softhome.net wrote:
> 
> >   With the proposal of multiple ranges and multiple domains (disjuntion
> >interpretation) you can say.
> >
> ><rdf:Property rdf:about="&p3p;disputeResolution">
> >   <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">dispute resolution</rdfs:label>
> >   <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">
> >     A collection of dispute resolution procedures that may be
> >     followed for disputes about a service&apos;s privacy practices.
> >   </rdfs:comment>
> >   <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&p3p;Policy"/>
> >   <rdfs:range
> >rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-independent-organization"/>
> >   <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-court"/>
> >   <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-applicable-law"/>
> >   <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-customer-service"/>
> ></rdf:Property>
> >
> >   And you have exactly what you wanted.
> 
> And if, given your approach, I wrote:
> 
>    <p3p:Policy>
>      <p3p:disputeResolution rdf:resource="&bwm;Gotcha"/>
>    </p2p:Policy>
> 
>    <rdf:Property rdf:about="&p3p;disputeResolution">
>      <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&bwm;Gotcha"/>
>    </rdf:Property>
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
>