W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2001

Re: Hammer vs. tweezers

From: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 16:38:53 -0700
Message-ID: <3B31340D.6CDEFD48@db.stanford.edu>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
pat hayes wrote:
> >jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote:
> >[...]
> > > > The set of statements that are subject
> > > > of semantic interpretation can be selected in an unspecified,
> > > > application-specific way.

For some reason, several people seem to be unhappy about the above side
remark of mine. If it does not make sense, well scrap it.

> You guys at db.stanford really do all think alike, don't you? :-)

If you mean Stefan, we do have lots of opinionated discussions on many
RDF-related issues. However, I'm glad that we look consistent from the
outside ;)
> While I agree with your overall theme here, it seems to go beyond the
> remit of RDFcore, as it requires a basic change to the language.

I'm happy to hear that layering is not a hopeless venue. I'd very much
appreciate your help along those lines, since several of the RDFCore
members including myself are far from being experts in formal logic. I
apologize in advance for many things that I will be arguing for that may
not make sense.

In particular, I hope you could find time to summarize the approaches to
reification extensively discussed on rdf-logic (Brian called for a
summary on that issue a couple of days ago). That would be a great help,
especially for the F2F.

Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2001 19:12:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:49 UTC