W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: Draft response to: Re: major technical: blank nodes

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:21:58 -0600
Message-Id: <p0623091bc00014a4b203@[]>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

>On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 16:50 -0600, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>  <<After volunteering for this I noticed that Dan
>>  had already responded to this message with an
>>  [OK?], so this might now be redundant.
>>   But here
>>  goes anyway.>>
>>  [...]
>>  >In addition, the term "blank node" creates a false analogy with RDF.
>>  >An RDF blank node is a node in a graph with no IRI.  A SPARQL blank node
>>  >is not a node at all, it is actually a variable that cannot be named in
>>  >the SELECT list.
>>  We disagree.
>That's the sort of place where I like to refer to a recorded

Ah, yes, I should do that.

>Your message is full of argument that isn't directly supported
>by WG records. That's fine if the WG endorses it...
>Meanwhile, I took some similar liberties in my message...
>some of which are arguably wrong.
>Hmm... I'll have to think this over.

No, lets stick to protocol, it would be a good discipline to get back 
to. Sorry I squirted this off in 'explain intuition' mode rather than 
'respond official' mode. I will correct in time for Tuesday.


>Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
>D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 27 January 2006 18:22:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:50 UTC