- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 17:50:17 +0300
- To: ext Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- CC: RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
On 2002-06-06 16:19, "ext Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org> wrote: > > At 03:27 PM 6/6/02 +0300, Patrick Stickler wrote: >> This is true. Or, err >> >> "" rdf:type True . > > I think that TimBL uses log:Truth and log:Falsehood in this way his work > with cwm, though that's subject to a different set of concerns. > > #g From what I've been able to see, and I'm not saying I grok it in all dimensions ;-) it's really a matter of taste and what counts is being consistent. Using RDF class membership seems pretty economical, though alot of RDF applications are heavily property oriented (duh) and thus not having explicit boolean types that can serve as the values of boolean properties requires having to constantly map between the property centric view to the class membership centric view which in the end is less economical than it seems. Time and practice will hopefully make us all wiser... Cheers, Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2002 10:46:15 UTC