W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Dispositions of Dave Beckett's comments

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 00:02:05 +0100
To: rdaniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
cc: "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, "'RDF Interest'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, "'spec-comments'" <spec-comments@prismstandard.org>
Message-ID: <2475.986252525@tatooine.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
>>>Ron Daniel said, in reply to comments by Aaron Swartz, fully
> quoted in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Apr/0007.html

> 1) PRISM is an application of RDF. RDF is a generic framework.
<snip/>
> 
> 2) PRISM applications are REQUIRED to produce legal RDF that
>    can be handled by any fully-compliant RDF processor.
<snip/>

The above two points (elided here) are what I expected PRISM's view
of RDF would be, but it has to be made clear in a note what a PRISM
processor requires, and how that differs from what a general RDF
system would do.  RDF systems can process PRISM, and not care about
ordering, and things will work just fine - although information will
be lost which is unfortunate but not the end of the world.

I assume that PRISM will be using RDF tools, so some RDF tools
authors might be encouraged to provide support for profiles of RDF
that have different requirements - PRISM and DAML are examples.

Dave
Received on Monday, 2 April 2001 19:02:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:48 GMT