W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-calendar@w3.org > December 2002

Re: [rdfweb-dev] Re: RDF semantics, access control description and timeranges

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:12:04 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: "Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@hotmail.com>
Cc: "www-rdf-calendar" <www-rdf-calendar@w3.org>

I think part of what we need to do is try some of these things, see how 
they work out, and then try and describe what works.  Some (many?) of those 
descriptions will be in the form of re-usable schemas, like this 
calendaring work.


At 12:55 PM 12/15/02 -0500, Bill Kearney wrote:
> > I'm with you here.  We definitely need some kind of default reasoning.
> > The decision has been made, AFAIK, that this will not be in RDF or in
> > OWL. If we need it, we will have to do it outside of RDF and OWL.
>This is something that needs clarification.  Or at least discussion.  In 
>at how to express both RDF and XML schema for data I find myself confused on
>what I can or can't say in each of them.  It's beyond the scope of each to
>comment about the other but the users (like myself) want to do a little of 
>each provides.  How to tell when one drops the ball and if the other can 
>pick it
>up is quite a mystery (to me anyway).
> > I think the confusion is on the natural language side (which is
> > probably closely related to our common sense reasoning).  Most people
> > would take the following two sentences to have the same meaning:
> >
> >    My computer accepts http, ftp and ssh connections
> >    My computer accepts http, ftp or ssh connections
>And how to write schemata that indicate this is a question new developers are
>very likely to ask about.  It feels like we're *so close* to being able to do
>this.  I just want to know what means to use to express it.
>-Bill Kearney
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Graham Klyne
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 08:11:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:11 UTC