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

rdf-concepts comments: this should be a note

From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 21:57:26 -0600
To: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B23D85A0-F072-11D6-842C-003065F376B6@aaronsw.com>

I printed out the RDF specs and read them over the weekend. I'm still 
undecided as to whether they were worth the trees killed. It's 
disappointing to see the cumulative complexification.

The concepts doc had a lot of interesting material, but very little I 
felt that should be normative. Those were:

2.3.2: Should this go into the media type registration?
2.3.4: This should be clarified and kept someplace.
In 3 and 4 seemed to be a lot of stuff that should go in syntax or 
model theory.

I didn't read too carefully; it was rather depressing. I'm rather 
tempted to restart my work on a competitor to RDF.
Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com] "Curb your consumption," he said.
Received on Monday, 4 November 2002 22:57:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:02 UTC