Graham Klyne wrote: > I think a "proper name" construct can be introduced without extending or > bending RDF as something like this: > > [AnyResource]--properName-->[(anon?)] --rdf:Type--> [ProperName] > [ ] --value-----> "(name string)" Can I ask a really stupid question: Why can't this just be: [AnyResource]--properName-->"(name string)" [AnyResource]--rdf:Type-->[ProperlyNamed] What is the utility of the extra node? Can't the schema for "properName" indicate that its object is expected to be a public string just like "rdf:value"? Also can't {[AnyResource]--rdf:Type-->[ProperlyNamed]} be inferred by relationships hung off of properName ? <signature format="mime/topic"> topic: Seth Russell isConfusedAbout: (anagramOf: DAML) prefers: {topic: DAML anagramOf: Distributed Agent Markup Language} topic: DAML inContextOf: { url: http://www.xml.com/pub/2000/11/01/semanticweb/index.html topic: DAML anagramOf: Distributed Agent Markup Language} inContextOf: {url: http://www.daml.org/ topic: DAML anagramOf: DARPA Agent Markup Language} topic: DARPA anagramOf: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency url: http://www.darpa.mil/ </signature>Received on Friday, 3 November 2000 15:01:24 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C0.50 : Wednesday, 11 January 2006 15:19:04 GMT