- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:44:11 -0600
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
>Pat: >> > >The summary of all this is that if you want to be a >> same-syntax extension >> > >of the RDF model theory and you have >> > >a) rdf:type as a property; >> > >b) defined classes, like DAML+OIL restrictions; >> > >c) some sort of complement or negation; and >> > >d) self reference >> > >I had wondered whether changing (a) and not having rdf:type as a property >would be the simplest fix. > >The other three all strike me as desirable. > >It seems like a very minor change to RDF ?? Really? it seems to me like stepping on a landmine. How will RDFS work without rdf:type? Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Thursday, 21 February 2002 12:44:12 UTC