Dan I have argue several times about the RDF Schema issues presented in summary in my mail. No I am not satisfied by Pat Hayes answer. My problem is that I don't have enough time to debate with excaustive details. The axis of critic are: 1) Some of the RDF/S features are not justified by real application needs (at least the 2-3 applications I am dealing with) 2) They imply serious implementation limitations For example, class cycles is a very confusing notion in P2P e-learning applications, developers can't skip off this costly reasoning since it is embedded in the default RDF/S Semantics and there no efficient algorithms to implement transitive closure computations. More than an official response, I need a fruitful scientific discussion on these issues. We at least trying to explain our objections in all our papers (http://139.91.183.30:9090/RDF/publications/FuncBook.pdf http://139.91.183.30:9090/RDF/publications/comp-networks2003.pdf) Best VassilisReceived on Friday, 21 March 2003 09:13:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT