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

Re: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:10:20 +0000 (GMT)
To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
cc: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0212101707560.16285-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Frank Manola wrote:

> "Consistent machine interpretation" sure.  But it seems to me you're
> going beyond that, to a requirement for a machine-interpretable
> definition as the basis for all this consistent machine interpretation.
>     As I said in an earlier message, that's something we want to move
> toward, but I don't think we can throw out the older approaches quite
> yet, as problematic as they may be (how do people write TCP/IP software,
> for example?)

OK, sounds like a reasonable position. Ultimately, the _point_ of the
semantic web is general machine-machine processing. As a first step,
there will certainly be a bunch of grassroots person-machine-machine
stuff (eg, the foaf bits and pieces) and we don't want to
discourage/deprecate the efforts of these people.

Big picture, I've got a lot of sympathy for Patrick's position in
general, but side with Dave & Dan on the particular issue of the primer
words etc.

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/
Q: What's yellow and equivalent to the axiom of choice? A: Zorn's lemon.
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 12:12:24 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:50 EDT