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

Re: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:08:27 +0200
Message-ID: <005301c2a1be$08c28860$b29316ac@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

We seem to be talking past each other and I seem to be completely
failing to communicate anything of value, so I'll not continue
this particular thread.


[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>; "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 11 December, 2002 16:06
Subject: Re: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer

> The problem you see with isDefinedBy etc., won't be any different when
> it comes to application vocabularies. xyz:Document, abc:Person, def:Event, etc.
> Yet we're still encouraging people to go create schemas for such 
> things and use them. Do you believe their classes and properties
> to be 'meaningless'?
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2002 04:09:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:03 UTC