W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: after hours discussion of dark triples [Was: Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2002-04-19]

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:27:07 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020419102433.0383f420@joy.songbird.com>
To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Cc: "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 12:48 AM 4/19/02 +0200, Jos De_Roo wrote:

>[...]
>
> > 19: Suggest after hours discussion of dark triples
>
>Since quite some time I am/remain convinced about *unasserted* triples.
>I think to have given (be it brief) evidence of that in
>-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jan/0178.html
>-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0087.html
>I couldn't better explain it than Pat in
>-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jan/0195.html
>or Tim in
>-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2001Jun/0124.html
>There is just more in the world than asserting RDF triples and
>RDF is too useful to restrict it to that.

I note that Tim's approach to nesting seems to be similar to what I've 
tried to thrash out in [1].

#g
--

[1] http://www.ninebynine.org/RDFNotes/UsingContextsWithRDF.html




-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 19 April 2002 05:31:14 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:33 EDT