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

Re: schema

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 13:42:32 -0400
Message-ID: <3CCED788.88518E0C@mitre.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Yes, but I thought we were talking about the name of a language, not an
instance of its use.  The original document talked about "RDF Schema". 
That wasn't referring to a set of declarations, it was referring to a
language;  more completely, something like "The RDF Schema Definition
Language".  You yourself just used the term "RDF schema vocab[ulary]". 
Is there something wrong with that?  

--Frank

Dan Brickley wrote:
> 
> the problem with 'schema' used as a noun is that there are lots of
> rdf docs that use RDF schema vocab in various ways, and only some of them
> (intuitively) feel like things we might label 'schema'. Pinning down
> criteeria for which docs 'are schemas' and which 'merely use RDFS vocab'
> is pretty slippery. Not that we couldn't do it, just that we haven't yet,
> and it's non-trivial.  We might try defining 'namespace' while we're at
> it. The XML folk didn't have much luck with that, though...
> 
> dan

-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-8752
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 13:43:15 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:40 EDT