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

RE: notation for literals

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:50:51 +0100
To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDCENKCDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
My view is that exactly one spec should contain a normative defn of the RDF
graph.

Then this belongs there.

From the model theory perspective the graph is syntax.

From the syntax perspective the graph is (data) model.

Jeremy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
> Sent: 25 April 2002 15:27
> To: Brian McBride
> Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: notation for literals
>
>
> >At 11:39 25/04/2002 +0100, Dave Beckett wrote:
> >[...] excellent summary snipped
> >
> >>but as Pat said, the MT can consider literals opaque once the
> >>equality rules are clear.
> >
> >
> >I was thinking equality rules should be in the mt.
>
> Well, I could write a paragraph trying to capture Dave's summary and
> insert it into the section on graph syntax. It would be a bit of a
> detour, but that entire section is already a kind of meander in any
> case.  I guess I assumed that this would fit more naturally in the
> syntax document somewhere.
>
> Brian, your call.
>
> 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 Thursday, 25 April 2002 10:51:17 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:36 EDT