On Aug 19, 2008, at 4:24 PM, Boris Motik wrote: > I really think we can't do much there. The problem occurs basically > because already the RDFS model theory contains consequences that > cannot be represented using the triple structure. For example, the > "pidgin" triple > > ( "1"^^xsd:integer, rdf:type, xsd:integer ) We could consider having owl:isTypeOf as a reverse version of rdf:type, then write: xsd:integer owl:isTypeOf "1"^^xsd:integer Perhaps the rules can be written using this instead and therefore keep within the (current) triple model. -AlanReceived on Wednesday, 20 August 2008 06:03:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:41:51 UTC