- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 09:49:59 +0100
- To: Gerd Wagner <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Gerd Wagner wrote: > 3) Data literals, object names, function symbols > and predicate symbols may be typed. Using suitable > predicate/atom types, this allows to represent RDF > and OWL rules directly (and not only via a "query > interface"). Could you elaborate on why typing of function and predicate symbols is required for representation of RDF (rules)? Surely the fact that typing is optional is one of the aspects of the proposal that helps with potential RDF compatibility. I appreciate that OWL/DL is different and having the option to enforce separation of data literals from resources is probably needed there, but such enforcement is a problem for RDF. Dave
Received on Friday, 5 May 2006 09:18:00 UTC