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

Re: RDF Issue #rdfms-logical-formalism

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:19:14 -0600
Message-ID: <3C167852.CA2E8FA7@w3.org>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:30 GMT