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

RE: Reification

From: Danny Ayers <danny@panlanka.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 23:40:28 +0600
To: "Peter Crowther" <Peter.Crowther@melandra.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EBEPLGMHCDOJJJPCFHEFEEDPDBAA.danny@panlanka.net>
<- You cannot control what reads your RDF if you express something
<- in RDF (just
<- as with HTML or with XML).

I believe you can.

 That reader may not be able to cope with your
<- range of expression, but may still try to extract what meaning
<- it can (just
<- as with HTML or XML); and it may get entirely the wrong end of the stick
<- (unlike HTML or XML).

Why should it be different than HTML/XML?

<- If RDF is designed (like any other Web protocol) to provide graceful
<- degradation, this is a disaster: imagine if an XHTML browser's tag for
<- "visible" caused all HTML4 and earlier browsers to *ignore* that content.

Ignore the tag would be preferable fallback, I'd have thought.

I see your point anyway - personally I think it would be better in the case
of uncertainty for the trumpets to sound, the drawbridge to be raised and
the oil put on the stove (or at least the transaction to be rolled back).

<- > - if this
<- > issue is *so* important, then everybody will include such a
<- > constraint and you've got your common language.
<-
<- Hasn't happened yet with any language or system of which I'm aware; can't
<- see it, myself, but would be fascinated to see a pointer to such
<- a language
<- or system.

it does seem unlikely, I must admit- though maybe one day we will all have
closing tags...
Received on Monday, 9 April 2001 13:43:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT