W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2002

re: [namespaceDocument-8] RDF and RDDL

From: Tim Bray <twbray@antarcti.ca>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:02:24 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3CBAEBB8.9070206@antarcti.ca>
To: www-tag@w3.org
TimBL wrote:
 >I suspect the "purpose" should be the Property linking the two.
 >rddl:Resource is just too vague to be useful, and to specify
 >a generic relationship and then qualify it (via an intremedite
 >node) with a property which gives the real relationship
 >is a form of reification.

I see the point but also a problem: you may not know - or
want to assert - the purpose.  You may just want to say
"here's a CSS stylesheet" or "here's a DTD".  The current
setup allows you to decide which of {nature-only,
purpose-only, nature+purpose} you want to provide.  In
fact rddl:Resource is a perfectly clear (albeit lightweight)
property, asserting "this resource is related", in fact
it should perhaps be renamed "rddl:Related".  It also
now dawns on me that with the RDF setup, I can easily and
economically give a related resource two different purposes,
i.e. some XSD schema is provided *both* for authoring
support and CVS-checkin-time validation.  -Tim
Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 11:11:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:31 UTC