- From: Elias Torres <elias@torrez.us>
- Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:39:04 -0400
- To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- CC: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, "public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf.w3.org" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Niklas Lindström wrote: > Hello, > > is it only me (and Ralph it seems in the minutes) who find @typeof > directionally wrong? Why not @oftype or @hastype? > > A superficial reading make it seem as "instance" was replaced by its > exact inverse: "type", which obviously cannot mean the same thing. Or > am I just misinterpreting how @typeof should be read? > > (Part of the thinking of "instanceof" was based on the N3 shorthand > "is ... of", which is N3:s version of @rev. N3 also has "has" as > syntax sugar for e.g. '<#me> has foaf:name "Niklas".', why I suggested > @hastype last year [1]. Along with @a. ;) ) > > Best regards, > Niklas @a sounds perfect to me. -Elias
Received on Friday, 4 April 2008 15:39:58 UTC