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

RE: more comments Re: top-level Comment on lBase

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:20:54 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021029122008.03e622e0@127.0.0.1>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

I was not expecting XML schema to be regarded as a SWEL, at least not at 
the current state of play.

#g
--

At 02:44 PM 10/25/02 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> > At 09:15 AM 10/25/02 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> > >A quick reply to one of pat's questions and then a list of
> > review comments.
> > >
> > > > ?? Can you say why XML Schema is nonmonotonic??
> > >
> > >default attributes in the syntax
> >
> > Is this at all meaningful?  Absent some notion of entailment or
> > inference,
> > which I don't see in XML schema, I'm not sure what it means to be
> > monotonic.
>
>Perhaps not, but in that sense the lBase doc has then also excluded XML
>Schema from being a semantic web language, since (unless you buy some of
>pfps's contortions in Yin/Yang), it cannot be expressed as a logical
>language in the way that lBase requires.
>
>I think being less ambitious and more specific in scope is desirable.
>
>Jeremy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 09:56:02 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:33 EDT