- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 15:02:15 -0500
- To: "Aaron Michal" <amichal@intellidimension.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
>Perhaps I should rephrase the question... Can an anonymous node be used >where a literal is required? As far as I know (?), literals are not *required* anywhere in the RDF syntax. >In other words, is it possible the have an >anonymous literal. I would say that was meaningless. However, it is possible for an anonymous node (or a uriref, for that matter) to denote a literal value, ie to have the same denotation as a literal. Pat Hayes >-AM > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Aaron Michal" <amichal@intellidimension.com> >To: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org> >Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 4:36 PM >Subject: <p> <rdfs:range> <rdfs:Literal> > > >> Perhaps this is something that has already been discussed but I want to >> check an assumption. Under RDF Model Theory [1], are the following triples >> legal RDFS? >> >> <_s> <p> <_o> >> <p> <rdfs:range> <rdfs:Literal> >> >> What about under http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/ or the >> previous version? >> >> -AM >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-rdf-mt-20010925/ >> >> >> -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 16:02:31 UTC