[sc34wg3] Some comments on TMRM v6.0

[Jan Algermissen]

Steve, Patrick,

On Jul 28, 2005, at 1:13 PM, Bernard Vatant wrote:

> This does not help to understand those primitives. I really would  
> like to catch the point
> of defining a property as a couple (key, value), but so far I miss  
> it, and the following
> comment "Properties are labeled values" adds to my confusion.

This remindds me of a question I have had for some time:

Does the RM assume that all values of a given property are of the  
same type (taken from the same value set)?

Consider RDF as an opposite example: RDF literals may be untyped or  
typed but if they are typed, it is because of the type information  
comming with the literal. The type of a literal is not derived from  
the predicate of the statement that the literal is the object of.

Jan



________________________________________________________________________ 
_______________
Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer                         
http://jalgermissen.com
Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT'   
http://www.tugboat.de