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

Re: abstract class

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 10:46:07 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030206104323.0351d7f8@localhost>
To: marc@jfcarrion.com, www-rdf-comments@w3.org

At 02:00 06/02/2003 -0800, Marc Carrion wrote:

[...]

>    would be true, but if we only have
>      _:xxx rdf:type rdf:Statement .
>      _:xxx rdf:subject <ex:a> .
>      _:xxx rdf:predicate <ex:b> .
>    that would not be a 'correct' model, I mean it's
>going to have a wrong Resource of type Statement.

Not true.  That looks like a fine graph to me.
[...]

>    I was thinking that Abstract Classes could be
>defined in the same way.

Sorry Marc, I'm not following you.  Is this formal communication with the 
working group.  We are in last call at the moment, and kinda busy.

What are you trying to say here?

Brian
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2003 05:44:55 GMT

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