Re: Should rdf:nil be rdf:Nil... from Dave Beckett on 2002-11-10 (w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org from November 2002)

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 19:34:36 +0000
To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7802.1036956876@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

>>>Graham Klyne said:
> 
> ... in keeping with the conventions for object and property names?

It isn't a class; or at least it wasn't till this week; it now might
be rdf:type rdf:List.  Can we batch up all these proposed renamings
and terms moving namespaces?

I've seen:
  rdfs:XMLLiteral (rdf:type rdfs:Class) to rdf:XMLLiteral
  rdfs:Datatype (rdf:type rdfs:Class) to rdf:Datatype
  rdf:nil (rdf:type rdf:List) to rdf:Nil

I want to see compelling reasons to do any or all of these proposed
changes.  So far, I'm not convinced.

Dave

Received on Sunday, 10 November 2002 14:35:46 UTC