- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 10:21:45 -0600
- To: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Cc: bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
I started to read thru your proposal... I got confused by a lot of the details, and I expect to ask you about that presently. Meanwhile... Drew McDermott wrote: [...] > If by "data model" you mean the graph model, then yes, it's the graph > model I don't like. I wouldn't say it's insufficently expressive; the > problem seems to be that it expresses too much. I don't really see what your language has to do with RDF, if you're not serializing a graph. Serializing a graph is what RDF is all about; semistructured data, graph merging, all that. It's reasonable to conclude, after the sort of investigation that we've been doing, that trying to shoehorn logical formulas into RDF is a losing game, and take some different approach such as yours. But I wouldn't call that "reforming RDF"; I'd just call it a new language. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 15 December 2000 11:27:24 UTC