W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: [URI vs. URIViews] draft-frags-borden-00.txt

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:16:54 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020227151624.00ae7e90@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: "me" <me@aaronsw.com>, "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, "www-rdf-comments" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
At 13:36 23/02/2002 -0500, Jonathan Borden wrote:
>Dan Brickley wrote:

[...]

>Yes. There is no need for the RDF community to concern itself with
>"subresources". That is to say, the notion of "subresource" is encompased by
>the RDF usage of the term "resource". I am thinking that the term
>"subresource" is itself misleading,

+1

Brian
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2002 01:54:14 GMT

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