- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:19:14 -0600
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
yup. I'm satisfied. Brian McBride wrote: > > Dan, > > In > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001JanMar/0077.html > > you raised an issue which was captured in > > http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-logical-formalism > > as > > [[[ > There are gotchas in representing the current RDF model in a logical > formalism. For example, a statement is defined as triple containing > containing at least two, possibly three resources. Resources are not > reasonable things to include in a triple. > ]]] > > As recorded in > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0294.html > > the RDFCore WG has decided to close this issue on the grounds: > > The WG closes rdfms-logical-formalism on the grounds that the > model theory adequately addresses this issue. > > Please could you respond to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org > indicating whether this is an acceptable resolution of this issue. > > Brian McBride > RDFCore co-chair -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2001 16:20:19 UTC