- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 07:51:31 +0300
- To: ext Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- CC: "ext Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On 2002-04-13 2:19, "ext Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com> wrote: > > [...] > >> Note: I've opted in this revision for rdfd:datatype rather than >> rdfd:range as the latter seems to be causing folks indigestion and I >> must admit that when taking the view that it is the datatype semantics >> which impose the constraints on the idioms (by providing valid >> interpretations of them), all rdfd:datatype is doing >> is associating a datatype context with a property, and thus >> is not really itself defining any kind of range. > > we've updated http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfd-rules.n3 > accordingly as well as etc http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p8e.n3 > as you may see we have rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a and 5b > but there may seem something strange with 5a and 5b > the intent is to represent bNodes at the THEN side Well, as I'm presently thinking 5a and 5b should be deleted, I'm not worried... ;-) > anyhow, it seems to work (at least for that test case) Cool. Cheers, Patrick > have a very nice weekend! > > -- > Jos > > -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Saturday, 13 April 2002 00:48:45 UTC