- From: Fran?ois <francoisleygues@yahoo.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 15:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
--- Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote: > Francois, > > In > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2000Apr/0067.html > > you raised an issue which was captured in > > > http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-constraining-containers > > as > > [[[ > Is it possible to constrain the members of a > container to be of a given type? > ]]] > > As recorded in > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Apr/0406.html > > the RDFCore WG resolved: > > [[ > o Expressing such a constraint is beyond the scope > of RDFS. Such > functionality belongs with more powerful ontology > languages such as > daml+oil and owl. > > o The WG notes that DAML+OIL can express this > constraint as described here. > > o The WG closes this issue > ]] > > Please could you respond to this message, copying > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > indicating whether this is an acceptable resolution > of this issue. > > Brian McBride > RDFCore co-chair > Ok, this is perfectly acceptable. I accept. François Leygues __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2002 18:46:26 UTC