W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2001

Re: RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised) W3C Working Draft published

From: Mike Moran <mmoran@netphysic.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:36:58 +0000
Message-ID: <3C223DDA.80101@netphysic.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

[ ... ]
>>I don't wish to troll, but it would seem like inheriting of  attributes 
>>is a thing most people would expect to be able to do in RDF, somehow.
>>
> 
> Why would one expect that? (And this is a serious question.)

[ ... ]


Simply for ease of representation. Why would one expect to be able to 
inherit attributes in any type system? This is what RDF appears to be, 
especially when there exists things such as rdf:subClassOf and the like.

I'm coming from a programming background, so I may have a skew on this, 
but that is what RDF `looks like' to me. When I see "subClassOf", or 
"type", various connotations and expectations arise such as the 
inheritance of attributes.

Before I go off on the wrong track again, could a potted
explanation be given of what type system RDF does have, and which 
programming model is closest to it? Note that I'm fine if you say it 
doesn't have one, just as long as I know.

In a separate mail[1], Dave Beckett says:


> I'm not sure even aboutEach would have solved this particular
> modelling problem.  RDF has subPropertyOf, subClassOf but does not
> have subResourceOf - you can't inherit resources, or the properties
> of them.  
> 

Right, now I'm confused. What are the entities that are being acted on 
here? I think it's time I did some more reading.

[1]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Dec/0100.html

--
Mike
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 14:37:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT