From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> > > RDF is used to describe resources, right? Bnodes describe resources. The > > use of the word 'single' is what we are arguing about. Certainly Bnodes do > > not necessarily describe only a *single* object in the domain of our > > discourse. One Bnode can describe many objects at once. For example: the > > following RDF Bnode description, written in N3 with it's corresponding > > schema (not included), certainly does not describe only one *single* > > automobile. > > > > [rdf:type :Automobile; > > :has :wheels, :motor; : > > :manufacturedBy :GM; > > :modelName "Oldsmobile"] > > No, no, no, a thousand times no!!!! Ok, ok, ok .. I was wrong .. mea copa. So how do we represent the class of oldsmobiles? [rdf:type rdfs:Class; :has :wheels, :motor; : :manufacturedBy :GM; :modelName "Oldsmobile"] But then can we say the following? [rdfs:subclass rdf:Statement rdf:subject :S1 rdf:predicate :P1 rdf:object :O1 dc:author :Seth] If not, why not? Seth RussellReceived on Thursday, 7 February 2002 09:34:23 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:34:49 GMT