At 06:08 PM 12/1/00 +0100, Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote: >Guha wrote: > > I have a simple (albeit potentially controversial) answer --- it is the > > range of the interpretation of RDF expressions. > >Controversial, indeed ! I'm not sure I dislike it, although :) > >But strictly speaking, if it is true, >then RDF describes Nodes and Arcs, not Resources... > >So, as I previously posed it, >I think the grapoh is the *interpretation* of the XML *syntax*, >but it is also a "higher level" *syntax*, whose interpretation is in the >world of resources (or entities, or both, I'm not sure)... That nicely encapsulates some thoughts I had on reading Guha's comment. #g (Who has always preferred to view the _graph_ as the primary _representation_ of an RDF description.) ------------------------------------------------------------ Graham Klyne Content Technologies Ltd. Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com> <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com> ------------------------------------------------------------Received on Saturday, 2 December 2000 14:21:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:34:44 GMT