Sorry Bob, I was reading the RDFS spec in a completely wrong way, as it
says clearly[1]:
"A typed literal is an instance of a datatype class."
So you're doing it all right, then.
My initial point was merely about putting rdf:value to better use, but I
understand your desire to have a specialized property, and since I can't
readily think of how rdf:value would be better, the co:count solution is
probably fine.
You could make co:count a subproperty of rdf:value, though.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_literal
--
Vasiliy Faronov
