- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 05:54:45 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Graham Klyne wrote: > With respect to the "anon-resources" issue and telecon discussion, I'd like > to stand back from the words. > > At the F2F in Sebastopol, I thought it was clearly stated by members of the > original RDF WG that the *intent* of <rdf:Description ...> without > 'rdf:id=...' or 'rdf:about=...' was to assert the existence of a resource > with given properties without identifying the resource. This is how I remember it, and consistent with the meeting record. Dan > > The discussion help then and subsequently seemed, to me, to indicate that > the current group felt that this is a reasonable requirement and > interpretation. > > (This discussion included some analysis of different options, led by > Sergey, using a subset of FOL to analyze the consequences of this and other > interpretations. I think there was also some exploration of use-cases, > though I don't now recall the details.) > > My text was an attempt to reflect this, but it seems to me that before > debating my text we need to agree on the general thrust and intent here. I > think that was questioned in last Friday's telecon, so needs to be reviewed. > > #g >
Received on Monday, 15 October 2001 05:54:46 UTC