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

RE: rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:06:15 -0000
To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDEEMBCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
> >   - this favours a reading of the relevant contradiction in M&S in which
> >para232 is dropped and para214 is preferred.
> I see no contradiction.  I see an overriding of a general rule in a
> specific case.

We differ.

> In my view, what you propose is better than the original, but it is a
> change to the original spec, not a clarification of a contradiction.

It is true that it is a change; but we are required to change contradictory

> >  - My proposed resolution is very simple, and hence makes reification
> > significantly more usable, and less of a barrier to RDF take-up.
> That is over egging things a bit.  Do you really think the problems with
> reification lie in this obscure bit of syntax?

This is one of the problems.
My personal preference is to drop reification entirely; I am not yet ready
to propose that yet. If we are keeping it we should do our best to make it
usable, within the constraints of our charter.
I feel very unhappy with keeping reification if we do not address any of the
problems with it.

Received on Thursday, 10 January 2002 07:06:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:54 UTC