- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 22:14:03 +0100
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, RDF-Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
>>>Aaron Swartz said: > While you're at it, please replace rdf:Description with rdfs:Resource so > that it uses the same typedNode construction as everything else. but that is totally redundant; since all nodes are implicitly of type resource by the RDF Schema rules. You need a simple way to say "here is a node, no more types known apart from the implicit resource one" which is rdf:Description. Changing that form gives no substantial user benefit. See http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Syntax for examples of such things using non-'rdf:type'd nodes. Dave
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2002 17:14:10 UTC