Re: RDF Semantics: partial review

>Hi Pat,
>
>I note that in
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0375
>
>you are responding to Herman indicating that some of the text in semantics has
>tried to avoid more obscure mathematical conventions.
>While I think this is generally desirable, I got the impression (without a
>detailed read), that the sections being discussed were things like proofs
>which were hardly going to appeal to a non-mathematical audience.

Well, OK, but there's can-read-math and 
lives-and-breathes-category-theory audiences, and the second is even 
smaller. I tried to follow Herman's basic advice (it does come out 
simpler, I have to admit) without assuming acquaintance with 
conventions like fxg(a) meaning <f(a),g(a)>

>(No particular suggestion - just a comment)

Ta.

Pat



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 13:10:54 UTC