W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > July 2003

Re: (Round 2) Proposed Extensions to OWL

From: Roger L. Costello <costello@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 08:26:07 -0400
Message-ID: <3F02CF5F.E43E8465@mitre.org>
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
CC: Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie>, tpassin@comcast.net

> <River rdf:ID="Yangtze">
>     <length>
>         <Length>
>             <measurement>
>                 <LengthMeasure>
>                     <rdf:type rdf:resource="LengthInMiles"/>
>                     <number>3914</number>
>                 <LengthMeasure>
>             </measurement>
>         </Length>
>     </length>
> </River>

> rdf:type is more "natural" RDF to my mind, means something to every 
> RDF application, and allows for more compact and generally more 
> human-readable RDF/XML. Unless there were a clear reason not to 
> I would favour rdf:type.
 
That seems reasonable to me Jon.  Tom (or anyone), do you have any
comments? /Roger

P.S. Folks, the archiving software for this list seems to be temporarily
down.  Please cc me on any messages pertaining to this topic.
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 08:33:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:59 GMT