- From: Dan Brickley <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 22:24:24 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- cc: www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: > In RDF, every class is a subclass of rdfs:Resource so surely that is just as > informationless too. > (I do wish RDF had used "thing" instead of "resource" which has a meaning in > URI already). > > TimBL So... are there identifiable 'things' that aren't 'resources'? (do you mean the Literals?). The RDFS design on this pretty much followed from the RDF Model claim that we inhabit the Web's world of URI-nameable resources... Could you say something about what you'd count as a non-resource 'thing'? (or is it a concern that we've coupled the RDF terms to concepts defined, and argued about, elsewhere...?) --dan
Received on Tuesday, 29 February 2000 17:26:31 UTC