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

Re: [Paper:] Logical Interpretations of RDFS - A Compatibility Guide

From: <tarod@softhome.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:08:37 GMT
Message-ID: <20011119160837.7721.qmail@softhome.net>
To: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough)
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, conen@gmx.de, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

  Sorry but I'm very tired about this, nobody can explain why the new
decision is better than the old one, but everybody decided that is better
because of DAML, and not everybody who wants to use RDF and RDFSchema,
wants to use DAML.

  I just wanted to show that w3c took a decision influenced by some
external party.

  Regards,
          Marc
 
  PD: and excuse me for my english if I could discuss this in spanish I
would explain it much better.


William Loughborough writes:

> 
> >Marc:: ...why the hell don't we forget DAML... to explain RDFSchema. RDF 
> >and RDFSchema..."
> >
> >Peter:: I strongly protest this
> 
> Somebody needs a nap/time-out? =|;~)>
> 
> --
> Love.
> EACH UN-INDEXED/ANNOTATED WEB POSTING WE MAKE IS TESTAMENT TO OUR HYPOCRISY
> 
Received on Monday, 19 November 2001 11:43:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT