- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 19:38:34 -0700
- To: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org>, "DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO)" <bob.ducharme@lexisnexis.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Well, I am quite happy to see that we have an rdfs:member now; this has been a frequent request. However, I am surprised to see it reported in the rdfs: namespace. What is the process by which new members get added to the namespace? At what point does addition of such members imply that we are dealing with a new version of rdfs? > -----Original Message----- > From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org [mailto:www-rdf-interest- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Graham Klyne > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 3:29 PM > To: DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO); www-rdf-interest@w3.org > Subject: RE: modeling nested containers with items > > > Well, there is rdfs:member in the latest RDF revision, of which rdf:_1, > rdf:_2, etc., are all sub-properties (according to [1]). > > #g > -- > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-mt-20030905/#rdfs_interp > > > At 12:25 08/10/03 -0400, DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO) wrote: > > >Oops, that was a typo. I meant to ask if anyone new of a well-known > >namespace with a "contains" predicate, which was why I mentioned the RDF > >Primer's myfoo:container example. > > > >Bob > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: jon@spin.ie [mailto:jon@spin.ie] > >Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 12:22 PM > >To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org > >Subject: RE: modeling nested containers with items > > > > > > > > > My new question: instead of the "created" predicate coming from > > > some > > > namespace that I just make up, does anyone know of one with these > >semantics > > > in a more well-known namespace? > > > >Qualified Dublin Core: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> has a predicate > ><http://purl.org/dc/terms/created> for the date something was created. > It's > >often used with the W3C datetime format, which uses the extended ISO 8601 > >format (with hyphens between parts) rather than the basic ISO 8601 you > are > >using. This is common on the web generally and I'd advise you use it for > >interoperability. > > ------------ > Graham Klyne > GK@NineByNine.org >
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2003 22:41:12 UTC