Re: Profiles intro

• From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
• Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:06:52 -0400 (EDT)
• To: bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk
• Cc: ivan@w3.org, clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de, public-owl-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20080410.090652.113976609.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Profiles intro
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:11:30 +0100

> 
> On 10 Apr 2008, at 13:46, Ivan Herman wrote:
> 
> > Bijan,
> >
> > let us not start a row here. I may have been a bit harsh in my
> reactions, Carsten hit a nerve:-) I do not think we should go down the
> road of differentiating among profiles on the basis of whether they are
> RDF-ish or not. Ie, can we set this aside and get back to the original
> issue? :-)
> 
> Ok, I'll rephrase your point: Regardless of whether it's true or not,
> RDFishness is not helpful in distinguishing fragments and may cause
> extreme negative reactions. Thus, we should find other points for
> guidance.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.

Hmm.  This seems like ignoring the elephant in the bathroom.

peter

Received on Thursday, 10 April 2008 13:16:45 UTC