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

Re: new semantics initiative

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:44:51 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020612094329.03410a20@joy.songbird.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>

At 12:38 AM 6/12/02 -0400, Dan Brickley wrote:
>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
>unrecognized.
>]]

Not quote, I think.  The above wording means that certain statements don't 
make it into the graph.  My understanding of Pat/Guha's proposal is that 
they make it into the graph but don't affect its truth denotation.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 05:23:12 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:13 EDT