- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:31:48 +0200
- To: Tom Van Eetvelde <tom.van_eetvelde@alcatel.be>
- CC: ML RDF-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
Tom Van Eetvelde wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation. I can conclude now that Appendix A is pure illustrative.
not exactly !
it is usable by a validator, which does not have to hard code the domain and range of rdfs:range; for example. What I said is that it is not SUFFICIENT, but not USELESS.
> self referential data structures are dangerous (cfr. Bill dehOra).
that's right,
that's what makes RDF powerful and scalable,
and that's why RDF alone is NOT a complete and sound logical language ;
but my conviction is that
- it can be restricted to fit another language (cf SiLRI, for example) to do hard reasonning
- it can be used alone to do "soft reasonning"
Pierre-Antoine
--- Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Whatever is said in Latin sounds important.
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2000 10:40:22 UTC