Re: reviewing pfps-11 proposed closure?

* Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> [2003-08-07 16:16+0100]
> Dan Brickley wrote:
> >Brian, (& everyone else),
> >
> >Did you get a chance to review Peter's proposed closure for pfps-11?
> 
> I just did.  It loses all sense of what a statement means.

I guess I view the reification vocab as accumulated junk, so that
doesn't bother me as much as it would if the reification vocabulary
worked. But that's not a very helpful view.

I am prepared to live with this edit. Does it go too far for you? Can
you think of some plausible middleground?

> >
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0014.html
> >
> >I can live with the specific changes he proposes there, but have had 
> >difficulty extrapolating from those examples to figure out what
> >"[and so on]" would amount to. Suggestions?
> 
> I assume similar changes for predicate and object.

OK, I had nagging fear it was 'and so on' through the entire spec...

I can extrapolate the text to those two properties ok.

Dan