- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 11:17:25 +0100
- To: "Garret Wilson" <garret@globalmentor.com>, <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
At 09:38 07/06/2002 -0700, Garret Wilson wrote: [...] ><rdf:Description> > <dc:creator> > <rdf:Description> > <rdf:value rdf:resource="urn:x-people:jane-doe"/> > <oebps:role>annotator</oebps:role> > </rdf:Description> > </dc:creator> ></rdf:Description> > >Right? That would correctly reflect the semantics I'm intending, correct? >And the value of dc:creator is a resource of type &person;, right? > >The big question: would this comply with the RDF Schema I gave at the first? An RDF schema processor won't barf on this; it will simply conclude that the value of the dc:creator property has type &person; However, I don't feel comfortable with the way this is modeled, though I'm finding it hard to say why. The question I am having trouble answering is what is the difference between the resource denoted by the b-node that is the value of the dc:creator property, and the resource identified by urn:x-people:jane-doe. I keep wanting to say they are equivalent, but these are my intuitions about based on the names. Have you considered and rejected defining a subproperty of dc:creator e.g. eobps:annotator? Brian
Received on Sunday, 9 June 2002 12:00:40 UTC