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

Re: The first sentence

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:02:48 -0500
Message-ID: <3DBD7BC8.936BBDB7@mitre.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Brian McBride wrote:
> 
> At 12:21 28/10/2002 -0500, Frank Manola wrote:
> >I still like my formulation:
> 
> So do I, its pretty close to my suggestion.  The difficulty I have is that
> the sentence in the primer does not make it clear whether it's the RDF
> information thats in the web or the resources that the information is about
> or both.  

That's a healthy ambiguity in my opinion; at least through the end of
the first sentence!  Resolving this ambiguity (which is sort of built
into what we're doing in some respects) in one sentence is a laudable
goal, but I really did try to clarify this in the next few sentences. 
Oh well, I suppose it's fair if *all* the editors have to change
something!  

Let me suggest something else:  if we're going to standardize things
across documents, how about we standardize the way we do references: 
e.g., 

*  for the Model Theory, Dave and I have [RDF-MODEL] and Concepts has
[RDF-SEMANTICS],  
*  for RDF/XML, I have [RDF-XML] and Concepts has [RDF-SYNTAX], 
*  for Schema, I have [RDF-SCHEMA] and Dave and Concepts have
[RDF-VOCABULARY], 
*  Dave and I have [RDF-MS] as a normative reference and Concepts has it
as an informational reference, 
*  etc. etc.

--Frank

-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-8752
Received on Monday, 28 October 2002 13:06:45 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:31 EDT