- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:11:37 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: W3C SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jan 15, 2010, at 4:08 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: > HI Greg, > > I am a little bit bothered by the usage of the rdfs:member property > in[1]. It is, syntactically, correct, of course. However, the intention > of rdfs:member was more 'operational' for RDFS reasoning than real usage: ... > ie, it is some sort of a helper property for containers. > > I think that, from a modeling point of view, using lists would be > cleaner. But then again, we run into our own problems of having > difficulties querying lists...:-( > > Sigh. I am not sure whether we should change that, but I though that > airing my (slight) discomfort is worthwhile... Yeah, I'm not happy with using rdfs:member, but wanted to demonstrate the sort of modeling that I'm after and start a discussion about it. It seems strange to have to create a new term simply because rdfs:member wasn't intended to be used directly (and the other container membership properties all make it difficult for querying). I think lists are a non-starter for the obvious querying issues. .greg
Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 09:12:11 UTC