Re: [Fwd: [GRAPHS] g-box, g-snap, and g-text] from Jonathan Rees on 2011-02-25 (public-awwsw@w3.org from February 2011)

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 11:39:34 -0500
To: nathan@webr3.org
Cc: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=36FCRzuxYJvcf7g4O+iSGXWJ7W8xYR93qMCOS@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
> In fact saying a 'g-box' is an 'information resource' should be
> logically inconsistent with my axioms. The reason is that if all of a
> URI's authorized readings are serializations of an RDF graph, then a
> 'bound' 'information resource' has to be a [generic] serialization of
> an RDF graph - it cannot itself be a graph.  (This explains why 'bound
> to' has to be an 'if and only if' relationship... so this exposes a
> bug in the axioms... [])

I checked the report and it already was 'if and only if' so there was no bug.

Please speak up if you don't like my terminology.

Jonathan

Received on Friday, 25 February 2011 16:40:09 UTC