- 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 02:00:57 UTC