W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Draft response to Ian Davis' comment

From: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:45:29 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=AW6Vvjq+xnxtSNsgcO7OJ9qE3dfrK=v=uTzkE@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>
Cc: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org> wrote:
> Andy,
>
> On 1/3/11 4:26 PM, "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote:
>> The terminology "RDF knowledge" has caused comment before.  It seems the
>> terminology doesn't work for some people.  I wonder if there is a better
>> way to express things here.
>
> This is the only (external) comment regarding this term and the (internal)
> discussions we had came about in the context of ISSUE-49 which was about a
> distinction that the term is specifically meant to clarify (i.e., the
> difference between the graph and what the graph IRI identifies).  I don't
> agree that the terminology doesn't work but rather in addressing comments
> regarding this distinction, the wording can be clarified (and we have done
> so in the past).

I agree with Andy that this term has caused comment before.
Personally, I'm OK with it, but it doesn't seem to be a well accepted
term.

Coincidentally, this came up on the Mulgara dev mailing list just
before Christmas. I've been away, but I've asked the person making
these comments to put in a formal submission, since our little open
source mailing list doesn't count.  :-)  My point in asking him to do
this is to ensure that the group is aware that there is some
resistance to the term.

I've heard a LOT of gripes about the documents that we have now, but
of course, very few people write to make those complaints formal. We
really need to pay attention to the few that do, since they could well
be representative of a much larger view.

<snip/>

Regards,
Paul
Received on Tuesday, 4 January 2011 16:46:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT