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

Re: Using third-party vocabularies

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 16:35:29 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204163258.04452bf0@127.0.0.1>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

At 11:13 AM 12/4/02 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote:


>>Jeremy:
>>maybe there are a few words that should added to the Concepts draft?  e.g.
>>[[
>>In publishing a statement with potentially significant legal or social 
>>consequences, one should take care to use vocabulary whose meaning is 
>>well-defined, stable and known to correspond to the intended meaning.
>>For important documents, such as contracts, this may mean that use of 
>>third-party vocabulary is restricted to terms defined by legislature, 
>>recognized standards bodies or other reputable organizations.  Using 
>>terms from untrustworthy sources may have unintended consequences.
>>]]
>
>
>?? insert
>[[
>restricted to terms defined by legislature,
>recognized standards bodies or
>other reputable organizations,
>*** or to terms with well-established social meaning. ***
>]]

Yes, I think that broadly works for me.  How about:

*** or to terms with otherwise well-established social meaning. ***

(noting that the defining bodies suggested are some ways of creating 
well-established social meaning, trying to dispel any suggestion of mutual 
exclusion.)

?

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 12:06:12 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:48 EDT