W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > February 2011

Re: [Fwd: [GRAPHS] g-box, g-snap, and g-text]

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

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:09 UTC