Hi Decoy, In a message dated 7/21/02 11:49:04 AM US Mountain Standard Time, decoy@iki.fi writes: > The same holds of RDFS, too -- no property is declared to be a part of > either the range or the domain. Again, the only reason we view such > relations as having been degraded into attributes is that the relevant > specs occasionally depict them that way and that the XML serialization > looks like the subject is somehow more tightly bound to the properties > than the object. The only time the principle breaks down is when one > considers putting literals on the left side of a relation. I see your view that I am imparting a deficiency on RDF based on its serialization syntax and my semantics for the word "Property"; however, I think the effect of the above combination leads to what I would consider weak uses of RDF (class/attribute modeling) instead of modeling relations. > OK. Just for the fun of it I'll put the association stuff up on > http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/shared/meta/rdf-stuff . Thanks for this!! I'll check it out. Thanks for your feedback, - Mike ---------------------------------------------------- Michael C. Daconta Director, Web & Technology Services www.mcbrad.comReceived on Monday, 22 July 2002 23:52:53 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 23 April 2007 18:20:00 GMT