- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:06:52 -0500
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Brian: >> There must be a strong call from the community to make the change. > >I suspect most of the members of the community who understand this issue >are in the WG. > >Brian: >> We should resist the temptation to fix things that we don't like but are not >> really broken. > >Agreed. This is really broken. Argued elsewhere. > >It acts as a significant barrier to the use of the RDF/XML reification >syntax, and hence as a barrier to the use of reification. If reification >is a good thing (which is moot, but I think we should assume) then this >needs fixing. Well, I wonder if before deciding one way or the other about the merits of reification, could we first decide what reification actually is? I thought I knew, but at the F2F the model theory I gave for reification (which I honestly thought was the blandest and least controversial interpretation one could wish for, and to directly follow the M&S) seemed to cause a firestorm. We havn't discussed reification since then, but if we are going to start, then please lets first define what we are talking about. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 22 October 2001 20:07:01 UTC