Re: discussion strawman: RDF Data Model Summary

Re-reading this post, I feel I ought to clarify a couple of points:

>2) Section 5 states that Properties are (a subset of) Resources.  Is 
>this really the case?  Can you really use a property wherever a 
>Resource is expected?  How about as a statement subject?  If they are, 
>there is no way to directly attribute a URI or ID to them with the 
>current syntax (an ID would identify the reification of that 
>statement).  If they are not, it would clear up the RDFSchema issue 
>of where subClassOf ends and subPropertyOf begins - you could have 
>'subClassOf' and 'subPropertyOf' for the seperate Resource and 
>Property type hierarchies respectively.

When I said URI or ID, I meant just ID (which, taken in context with 
the document's URI forms a unique URI-reference).  My understanding 
is that URIs are never directly attributable to resources.

Of course in the current syntax, Descriptions can be associated 
directly with URI-references (via the 'about' attribute) to allow 
statements to be made about any resource.  As stated by the spec, 
Descriptions are the equivalent of a bag of statements *about* a 
particular resource.

>3) Section 5 should state that statements are also (a subset of) 
>Resources - I believe that rdf:Statement is a subclass of 
>rdfs:Resource in RDFSchema.  Hence you should also be able to attribute 
>URIs to their reified representation as well.

Ditto, scrap the second sentance.  The main point is that 
'rdf:Statement' is a 'subClassOf' 'rdfs:Resource', yet the RDF M&S 
spec does not state that statements _are_ a subset of resources.

Received on Monday, 11 September 2000 04:12:18 UTC