- From: R.V.Guha <guha@guha.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:01:28 -0700
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Brian, You have summarized well. As you point out, there are two distinct issues. One is that of dark triples. We don't have a choice about that. If we want to allow webont layering, without us or them getting non-monotonic, we have to provide it. About axiomatic definitions of languages: I am not surprised at the reaction of Peter F Patel Schnieder and Ian Horrocks. They have in the past made it very clear that they do not, as a matter of principle, like axiomatic definitions of languages. I would like to get a wider sample, especially from the folks building stuff (like Libby, Connolly, ...). What we are proposing is relatively old-hat. There may be discussions of style, but not of substance. So, I don't expect much time to get spent on this. If anything, it will save us time by clarifying a bunch of issues. Given the number of different folk who have responded saying that it would be a useful part of rdf specs, even if it does not get used by webont, I humbly propose that we do. guha
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 17:02:05 UTC