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

RE: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?

From: Charles F. Munat <chas@munat.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 13:33:28 -0700
To: "RDF-IG" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LHEGJAOEDCOFFBGFAPKBOEINCEAA.chas@munat.com>

So everything is a thing?



Charles F. Munat
Seattle, Washington

Received on Sunday, 8 April 2001 16:35:50 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Seth Russell: "Re: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"
Previous message: Seth Russell: "Re: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"
In reply to: William Loughborough: "Re: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"
Next in thread: Seth Russell: "Re: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"
Reply: Seth Russell: "Re: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"
Reply: Frank V. Castellucci: "Re: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"
Reply: William Loughborough: "RE: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

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