On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 14:03:19 +0200
"Michael Schneider" <[email protected]> wrote:
> So, if
>
> :s "lit" :o .
>
> must not have a semantic meaning, what about
>
> "lit" rdf:type rdf:Property .
>
> ? As, according to what you say above, you are willing to allow for
> literals in subject position, this triple is fine for you
> syntactically. But what about its meaning? Would this also be
> officially defined to have no meaning?
It would have a meaning. It would just be a false statement. The
same as the following is a false statement:
foaf:Person a rdf:Property .
--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:[email protected]>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
