W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Re: completing the trawl of comments

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:53:56 -0400
Message-ID: <3EA840D4.D48B8B1A@mitre.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Brian McBride wrote:
> Folks have done a good job of picking up the loose comments identified by
> Jan.  Thanks to all.  I think they all covered now except (possibly) those
> below.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0295.html
> [EricP's comment about examples in Primer. Frank's prompted him for
> reasons why; this is to do with nonopaqueness issue of URLs. No response
> from EricP but I think this is captured in other discussion]
> Frank??
> I have a recollection of seeing some traffic on this but can't find it in
> the archive.  If I missed it sorry Frank.  Frank, do you think anything
> more than a "closed given lack of response" is needed?

I'm not sure.  Eric talked to me at the Tech Symposium about this.  As a
result, he had promised to send me some words that I'd try to stick in,
but he never did, and I forgot to ping him about it.  However, the words
he was supposed to send me were to describe the fact that there was this
*convention* he was referring to in his comment, that URIrefs with
fragment ids referred to abstract (non-retrievable) things like people,
and the other URIrefs referred to retrievable things like Web pages. 
However, RDF doesn't formally recognize that convention (and I'm not
sure I really agree with it), and Eric's probably busy with other stuff,
so I'd just as soon drop it.


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 Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:58:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:05 UTC