W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

SCHEMA TODO: Re: Comments on informal meaning of the RDFS vocabulary

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:21:43 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030129212009.0cdeb6b8@localhost>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

At 16:03 29/01/2003 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

[...]

> >
> > We seem to have switched to rdfs:label.  The text at:
> >
> >    http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_label
> >
> > is
> >
> > [[
> > rdfs:label is an instance of rdf:Property that is used to provide a
> > human-readable version of a resource's name.
> >
> > A triple of the form:
> >
> > R rdfs:label L
> >
> > states that L is a human readable label for R.
> > ]]
> >
> > Right, that could be tidied up:
> >
> > [[rdfs:label is an instance of rdf:Property that may be used to provide a
> > human-readable version of a resource's name.]]
> >
> > Would that be better?
>
>Probably, but rdfs:label is much less of a problem than rdfs:comment.

Danbri - does that seem like a reasonable change to you?  I think that is 
one, that as editor, you have discretion to make.

Brian
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2003 16:20:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT