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

Re: IsDefinedBy [was: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer]

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:36:43 -0500
Message-ID: <3DF7AFEB.4000207@mitre.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Brian McBride wrote:

> 
snip
> 
> With regards to isDefinedBy, I think it would be fine for the primer to 
> say nothing about it.  If the WG felt that the primer would be enhanced 
> by a short description, I might suggest something along the lines of the 
> following would describe the WG's decision:
> 
> [[
> It is often useful to indicate in an RDF graph where the definition of a 
> class or a property, or indeed any resource, may be found.  The 
> rdfs:isDefinedBy property may be used for this purpose.  This property 
> may be used to indicate an RDF Schema that describes the resource, 
> however, RDF imposes no constraints on the values this property.  If the 
> resource that is the value of such a property is retrieved from the web, 
> it may be an RDF Schema, but there is no guarantee that it will be.
> ]]
> 
> This text lacks the lightness of touch and ease on the readers eye that 
> I would hope for in the primer, so does require some help from the 
> editor, but I hope indicates the sort of thing we might usefully say in 
> this document.
> 


Writing with the lightness of touch and ease on the readers eye for 
which he is so well known, the editor asks:  when might the WG be 
expected to express its considered opinion on this subject?

--Frank "non-normative semantics" Manola




-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2002 16:23:08 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:51 EDT