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

Re: Making progress

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 17:15:52 +0100 (BST)
To: "R.V.Guha" <guha@guha.com>
cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0206251712510.27038-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, R.V.Guha wrote:

> I'd like to reiterate Pat's point.
> If darkness is specified by the addition of something to the graph, then
> there is no way to avoid non-mon. We have been over this many times now.
> Could we please stop reopening this issue?
> Jan, same problem occurs with your proposal too. Let us suppose a file
> contains:
> <rdf:Descrpition rdf:about="eg:foo">
> 	  <eg:blah>wibble</eg:blah>
> </rdf:Description>
> Nothing is dark here. I then merge this with another file containing
> <rdf:Descrpition rdf:about="eg:foo">
> 	  <eg:blah rdf:dark="yes">wibble</eg:blah>
> </rdf:Description>
> I have essentially retracted statements from the first file without touching it.
> Darkness specification has to be *in the language*, not in a particular
> file using the language.

I'm sorry; I was under the impression that the light and dark universes
pretty much never collided (ie, that the result of that merge would be a
graph* with one light triple, and one dark triple, the components of
each being the same): that is, when drawing RDF, I'd need two different
coloured pens.

If a triple is _either_ light or dark, but not both, then sure, ok, I'll
shut up.


* for appropriate structures corresponding to the word "graph"

jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
Scrabble gematria: "BIBLE" = "DOGMA"
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2002 12:18:28 UTC

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