- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:23:26 -0400
- To: public-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51589B3E.6090302@openlinksw.com>
On 3/31/13 3:16 PM, Mo McRoberts wrote: > I proposed broadening the range to rdfs:Resource because I can think of a range of cases where keys "belong" to things which aren't usefully described as foaf:Agents. For example, a server listening for SSH connections has its own identity (the so-called "host key"). Once could_theoretically_ claim that the server was a foaf:Agent operating on behalf of the owner/administrator, but if you do that you risk diluting the meaning of foaf:Agent to the extent that it becomes utterly meaningless. What about adding owl:Thing to the mix? Basically, I am assuming that the following is true: owl:Thing owl:equivalentClass rdfs:Resource. If the above is false, then we have insight that will ultimately lead to useful insights about what's being modeled here. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Sunday, 31 March 2013 20:23:53 UTC