Re: Suggested changes to concrete datatypes proposal

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 01/30/01

One other quick comment.

From: Jeff Heflin <>
Subject: Suggested changes to concrete datatypes proposal
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:26:31 -0500

> 3) we still restrict what can be said about the concrete domain. For
> example, you can't have a DataType as range of rdf:type (so users can't
> specify new instances of a data type), as range of rdfs:domain (so no
> property can have a data type as its domain), or as the domain and range
> of rdfs:subClassOf (so no hierarchical relationships can be specified).

Unfortunately, rdfs:Class is the universal class, as rdfs:Literal is an
instance of rdfs:Class.  Making rdfs:Class be only for abstract classes
would require a change to RDFS.


PS:  Note that even the current proposal would require some sort of change
along this line.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST