Re: RDF Statements as floating Cons Cells

On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, pat hayes wrote:
[..]
> Maybe we should stick to using RDF as a simple ground-data language,
> and just build or use something else altogether for doing more
> complicated stuff.

Shove in a version number ("RDF 1.0") and that's pretty much my view. For
simple ground-data, the node'n'arc stuff's really handy, but it is painful
to watch the contortions people have to go through when they decide to
represent everything and anything as RDF 1.0 triples.

> Pat

Dan