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

Re: use/mention and reification

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 23 Jan 2002 07:56:34 -0600
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1011794194.4874.56.camel@dirk>
Ugh... discussion diverges
into metaphysics and philosophy.

Here are the options I find acceptable:

(a) Shoot reification on the grounds that
there isn't consensus about what it means
nor how to use it.

(b) accept my proposal to clarify/change
how it works, based on my implementation
experience, DanBri's, and Jos's.

In order for this to fly, I owe a pile
of test cases. (or Jos or Danbri or
somebody(ies) who agree with this position).

It seems that I'd have to do a bunch of
advocacy too. Bad news is: I really don't
care about it enough to prioritize
it high enough to do a bunch of advocacy.
Either my position is basically understood
and agreed by the WG and the community,
or I'm happy to (a) shoot it. That is:
if there aren't a bunch of people out
in the community who understand rdf:subject
the way I do, then the well-known-name
does me little good; I can just make
up my own namespace.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 08:56:34 UTC

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