- From: Danny Ayers <danny@panlanka.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 00:45:01 +0600
- To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Seth, the fastest mentograph in the West!!!! The diagram makes it emminently clear, I for one was making things more difficult than they need to be. (what tool(s) do you use for the pics, BTW) --- Danny Ayers http://www.isacat.net <- -----Original Message----- <- From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org <- [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Seth Russell <- Sent: 29 April 2001 23:54 <- To: Steven Livingstone; danny@panlanka.net; altheim@eng.sun.com <- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org <- Subject: Re: "If" and "else" in RDF <- <- <- From: "Steven Livingstone" <stv_ca@hotmail.com> <- <- > <Gender id="Male"> <- > <rdfs:label>Male</rdfs:label> <- > <address>Mr</address> <- > </Gender> <- > <- > <Gender id="Female"> <- > <rdfs:label>Female</rdfs:label> <- > <address>Ms</address> <- > </Gender> <- > <- > To me the relationship is implicit in the definition, no "if then" is <- really <- > needed. <- <- I agree. One can declare the needed relationships between things without <- recourse to the tricky "if_conditional_ then_action" construct. I <- mentographed your RDF in the diagram below: <- <- http://robustai.net/mentography/Gender.gif <- <- ... look ma .. no contradictions :) <- <- Seth <- <-
Received on Sunday, 29 April 2001 14:49:38 UTC