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

Re: new semantics initiative

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 00:38:31 -0400 (EDT)
To: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0206120029550.21468-100000@tux.w3.org>


Thanks Pat.

My gut reaction after talking to various people, re-reading, agonising, is
that we should give serious consideration to running with this proposal.
It is not as radical a change as might be suspected. It merely emphasises
that the MT is one tool amongst many for capturing the essence of RDF, and
that this WGs deliverables have a natural mapping into textbook logic, as
(hopefully) will WebOnt 1.0, WebOnt 2.0 and various other future Semantic
Web languages.

I have to think about the dark triples stuff some more in the light of
these proposal. Sometimes it all sounds like quasi-mystical voodoo, other
times (like today) it seems like a re-characterisation of stuff from
M+S'99, ie:

http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/ [[
When an RDF processor encounters an XML element or attribute name that
is declared to be from a namespace whose name begins with the string
"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax" and the processor does not recognize
the semantics of that name then the processor is required to skip (i.e.,
generate no tuples for) the entire XML element, including its content,
whose name is unrecognized or that has an attribute whose name is

This stuff and the old (also broken) RDFS CR 'extensibility' section, ie.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/#extensibility were
our previous attempts at getting layering, future proofing right.

I hope we get it right this time. Leaving extensibility to version 2.0 has
inbuilt difficulties...


Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 00:38:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:58 UTC