W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: W3C specification error

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:42:01 -0500
To: Andrea Proli <aprol@tin.it>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041129184200.GG20326@homer.w3.org>

Thanks, I'll take a look. I remember (dimly!) the group making some decision on
this which seemed counter-intuitive. I've copied www-rdf-comments to put
your note on the record, hope that's OK. I think what happened might be
that the mathematics of having the more constrained form were quite 
tricky, so we ended up saying just 'Resource'...

Thanks again,


* Andrea Proli <aprol@tin.it> [2004-11-29 02:37+0100]
> Dear Mr. Brickley,
> I think I have found an error in the W3C Specification "RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema" (10 February 2004).
> Since you are the co-editor of the above mentioned specification, I thought it could be useful for you to receive this notification.
> However, I am new to RDF, so please forgive me in the case I'm wrong.
> In the very last paragraph of Section "5.3.3 rdf:predicate" you wrote: "The rdfs:domain of rdf:predicate is rdf:Statement and the rdfs:range
> is rdfs:Resource". I found it inconsistent with previous definitions, and I argue that the rdfs:range of rdf:predicate should be rdf:Property
> instead of rdfs:Resource.
> Obviously, I wrote to you because I didn't find this error in the errata section. Am I wrong about it?
> Thank you for your attention,
> Andrea Proli
Received on Monday, 29 November 2004 18:42:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:22 UTC