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

RE: rdfs:range is primarily PRESCRIPTIVE!

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:43:51 +0200
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B78877321144043114C097@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> This strongly suggests that you are using this word 'descriptive' 
> differently from me. 

This definitely appears to be the case. 

> I have asked you several times to clarify your 
> descriptive/prescriptive distinction, and neither you nor anyone else 
> has done so, so perhaps this disagreement is over nothing. 

With all due respect, I have provided examples.

C.f. 

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0326.html

Just what kind of example are you looking for? I won't 
be providing a MT treatment of it if that's what you mean.

> >Sorry, you are just way wrong on this one, Pat.
> 
> I beg to differ. I should also maybe tell you that I am not 
> susceptible to simple browbeating.

My apologies for being so terribly rude. Truly.

I feel like I've been in the Twilight Zone where every word I use 
no longer holds its meaning and every time I write "green" folks
read "blue", and the frustration has been significant.

So, according to your definitions of those slippery words,
I was wrong and according to my definitions you were wrong,
but in reality both of us are right -- we're just not talking
about the same things. Sigh.

I apologize again for my demeanor. I was out of line.

> Or maybe you are. But a more positive assumption would be that we are 
> not disagreeing, but simply misunderstanding one another.

That evidently is the case ;-)

Humble apologies for the heat,

Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 12:43:55 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:42:39 EDT