W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 2003

Re: [proposal to close] pfps-22,pfps-23: "reserved names in abstract syntax"

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 08:02:38 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <20030807.080238.50027925.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
Cc: gk@ninebynine.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [proposal to close] pfps-22,pfps-23: "reserved names in abstract syntax"
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:49:42 +0100

> On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:36:28 -0400 (EDT)
> "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> 
> > Vocabulary 1:
> > 
> > 	rdf:first rdf:rest
> > 
> > Vocabulary 2:
> > 
> > 	rdf:List rdf:nil
> > 
> > What namespaces names can be used to identify these vocabularies?
> 
> Identifying other sets of terms or comparing sets of terms, is not
> something I'm dealing with or need to.  Try OWL :)
> 
> The RDF Vocabulary is a particular set of terms (infinite since it has
> rdf:_n), neither of which is Vocabulary 1 or 2 above. So it isn't the
> RDF namespace name.
> 
> But I'm telling you stuff you already know.  Please explain the problem.
> 
> Dave

The problem is that vocabularies exist independently of namespace names.
Saying that a namespace name identifies a vocabulary, even the RDF and RDFS
vocabularies, is incorrect.  The RDF vocabulary is not identified by a
namespace name or even by a namspace.

peter
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2003 08:02:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:32 GMT