- From: Nikita Ogievetsky <nogievet@cogx.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 01:56:34 -0400
- To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OE8Pf3L9BGTuAyHsjCG000004dd@hotmail.com>
Hello all, is this a valid RDF: <rdfs:Property ID="aProperty"> <rdf:comment>This is a somewhat important property.</rdf:comment> <aProperty rdf:resource="http://resource"/> </rdfs:Property> where default namespace is this document. Some examples out of the blue: usefulness of being useful sense of having sense importance of being important smartness of being smart thoughtfulness of being thoughtful existence of existence etc. This is a pessimistic one :-) <rdf:Property ID="sense"> <rdf:comment>A measure of making sense on the scale 1 to 100.</rdf:comment> <sense>5</sense> </rdf:Property> And here is another one. Russian writer M. Gorkiy in a play "On the bottom" has this idea that being kind is not kind at all. Could this be modeled: <rdfs:Property ID="kindness"> <kindness>0</kindness> </rdfs:Property> I guess the proper way to formulate the question is: is it valid from RDF standpoint (an why not?) if subject and predicate are same? Object and subject can obviously be same: My advisor is myself, for example. All three are the same: vagueness of being vague is vague Thanks, --Nikita.
Received on Sunday, 15 July 2001 02:00:56 UTC