W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > January 2014

Re: schema.org as it could be

From: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:56:23 -0600
Message-ID: <CACfEFw9X-tp2Uip_G2WrT0U3zNYnBnc=B7Hky6KX8gxLywOSCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, public-vocabs@w3.org, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
On Jan 7, 2014 10:43 AM, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
> I wasn't aware that anything I sent out here was "from a DL perspective".
 I freely admit that I was working towards a formal perspective, but I
don't see anything wrong with that, and furthermore the account I've sent
out so far is only pre-theoretic.

>> Bare text can be used as if it was the value for any property.

Where schema says the range is    http://schema.org/URL or
http://schema.org/Organization (as with http://schema.org/branchOf), should
we need to determine whether a textual string is a URI or a URL?

I ask because the DL literature did not manifest in a vacuum, and because
my RDF library has Literals and URI References.
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2014 16:56:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:20 UTC