- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 12:57:40 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 16:11:19 -0500 Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > The world doesn't have facts like that in it. Classes and properties > are intellectual constructs, not the stuff of reality. Hell, if a > particle can be a wave, then surely a class can be a property. > Anyway, RDF doesn't make logical a priori rulings about these kind > of metaphysical segregations. For example, xsd:Number is a class, a > property and an individual in RDF. Indeed - but who has claimed that classes and properties are disjoint? Although they may well overlap in some cases, foaf:Person still isn't a property. Without knowing the definition of foaf:Person, it's difficult to conclude that foaf:Person is not a property. However, even without knowing the definition of a literal, it is easy to conclude that it is not a suitable node to be used as a property, so in my opinion, it is sensible to state that triples containing a literal as the predicate have no meaning (even though I think they should be syntactically allowed). -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 11:59:01 UTC