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

Re: doing provenance in RDF 1.0 clarified

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:28:28 -0500
Message-ID: <3C6BD79C.5020306@mitre.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>, jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Brian McBride wrote:

> At 17:32 13/02/2002 -0500, Frank Manola wrote:
> [...]
>>> I think this decision effectively makes rdf:subject etc. vocabulary
>>> useless, i.e. not having any special meaning (I believe Pat made this
>>> point earlier). In other words, 4-triple reification becomes effectively
>>> deprecated (which is fine with me).
> I disagree.  It works just fine, in either Statement or Stating 
> interpretation for my use of it in the P3P schema.
>> How about adding a straw poll on the last sentence to the reification 
>> subagenda?
> We already decided not to shoot it.  Please move forwards, not backwards.

I agree that the *sentiment* was not to shoot it, but I don't believe 
there was an explicit resolution taken about the 4-triple syntax.  I 
view this as "saying explicitly what was decided", not "moving 
backwards."  (NB:  If we *really* want to move backwards, all we need to 
do is keep leaving stuff like this inexplicit, and watch it come up again.)


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 Thursday, 14 February 2002 10:24:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:55 UTC