Re: single property not required (Datatypes)

On Wednesday, July 31, 2002, at 11:36  AM, Dave Beckett wrote:
>>>  5. Only one age property required.
>> If it wasn't obvious I contest this decision and call for a revote.
> It wasn't a vote but I see it as highly unlikelty that vocabularies
> such as Dublin Core are going to invent two RDF properties for every
> property in their model just to get datatypes.

I don't understand that at all. Either the property is already in 
existence and people are required to write something like:

:John :age "4" .
(i.e. the object is a literal containing a bunch of numerals)

and this is just a way to describe that more formally or they're 
creating a new property which either doesn't have a standard datatype 
scheme and they'll use the local idiom or it does and they'll use an 
idiom like above. If they pick the first, they'll optionally create a 
second property if they want to make it easier for people to abbreviate 
a standard form.

I don't see why this is so special. We don't get upset that people have 
to make author and authorName if they want to abbreviate. How is this 
different?
--
Aaron [http://www.aaronsw.com] 4FAC4838B7D8D13FA6D92EDB4145521E79F0DF4B

Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2002 13:22:41 UTC