W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: RDFS versioning

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:31:18 -0000
Message-ID: <00de01c09ce4$9b05d0a0$52dd93c3@z5n9x1>
To: "Bill dehOra" <BdehOra@interx.com>, "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@upclink.com>, "RDF Comments" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Looked at in a certain way, this is a very, very good thing. If A
> moves to schema aa and expects to be able to converse with B
> using schema a,

Don't forget that the SW aim is that eventually both A and B can
convert their systems from using "a" schema to "aa" schema
automtically by semantic botostrapping.

O.K.... let's say A uses "a", and B uses "a". Now, C comes along with
"aa". A tries to read something of C's (written in aa), but can't.
Luckily either the aa schema has assertions about how it relates to
"a", allowing A and B to upgrade, or these assertions are found in a
third party index (ahem...SWAG...ahem).

Versioning is good... but I thought that part of the SW was how to get
around versioning?

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 10:29:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:13 UTC