RE: rdf schema bag question

>1) This is still an RDF issue:
>
>http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-constraining-containers

Well, in general ok, but the question was specifically about constraining
the members to be literals which (because of rdfs:Literal) isn't necessarily
the same as constraining their class to any arbitrary type.

>2) However, DAML solve that in some way. The problem
> is that RDF containers seems deprecated now.

I wasn't aware of this deprecation - do you have a ref?

>3) It is also possible to subclass Containers and to
>define some non standard convention...

Is there clarification anywhere of the current meaning of range when applied
to a container class?

>4) It would be nice if a global status about this
>question was presented here...

Yes. (please!)

Cheers,
Danny.

Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2002 09:29:05 UTC