Re: How do Schemas support RDF collections?

> Problem is, i am told, this is not always the case.  For example if {W
> dc:creator (A, B)} then we cannot in good faith say that {W dc:creator A. W
> dc:creator B.}.  There are lots of relationships that simply do not

Hmm... I guess so.  I think I wanted rdf's collections to be a shorthand 
for a big collection of relationships.  Since the collection itself is 
such a virtual resource (I would say it has less status than a bNode) 
I'm losing my faith in its usefulness.

I think there has to be added semantics about collections so we can be 
smarter about them during processing.

> .... hmmm ... what namespace wants to claim such a term ?

An internal one.  We're developing an ontology for our internal data 
structures.  We have Groups of things, and I was trying to find an 
efficient way to describe that.  I think we have to have multiple 
identical properties defined for a single object (instead of using a 
Bag) for our ontologies to define everything we need.

Still learning. :)

thanks!
Seth