- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 16:52:54 +0000
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "RDF core WG" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Thanks, I'll advise CC/PP accordingly. I just realized I have another question: are all instances of rdfs:Datatype also rdfs:subClasseOf rdfs:Literal? i.e. _:x rdf:type rdfs:Datatype entails _:x rdfs:subClasseOf rdfs:Literal ? (This was not mentioned in Brian's note [1] on RDF schema.) #g -- [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0442.html At 04:51 PM 10/29/02 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > I also understand that, following DanC's requests, > > > > _:x ex:prop "foo" . > > ex:prop rdfs:range xsd:string . > > > > will be satisfiable in conformance with xsd:string datatypeconstraints. > >No decision - the current drafts say NO. > >Concepts say a literal is a pair. >Ntriples says "foo" goes to "foo"-"" >Model theory says untyped literals are self-denoting. > >"foo"-"" is not an xsd:string. > > > > > But, what about this: > > > > _:x ex:prop "http://example.org/" . > > ex:prop rdfs:range xsd:anyURI . > >Similarly, currently this is a NO. > > > > > #g > > -- > > > > PS: in my subject line, I say "test cases", which these are strictly > > not. > >They could be made so by the invention of a new test case. > >Jeremy ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 12:07:16 UTC