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

Re: one line RDF abstract syntax. was RE: RDF core: abstract syntax and semantics - an attempt

From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 16:32:54 -0400
Message-ID: <04d701c0fb5a$853c8be0$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Graham Klyne wrote:

>
> BUT, the attempt to try and find some common understanding is not helped
by
> changing the ground-rules.  Hence my abstract syntax/semantics attempts to
> follow the current specification.  If it helps to crystalize some
consensus
> about what we're trying to achieve, THEN I think we can more fruitfully
> consider the best way of achieving those goals.
>

Graham,

It is evident that there is no clear understanding about what the current
specification says or means, so I am totally unsure about what the current
'ground rules' are intended to be. The effort to find some common
understanding, I submit, is made my rational discussion of the issues and
alternatives.

Since the definition of a resource appears to be anything that has an
identity, and since a statement has an identity, it seems perfectly natural
to use a statement directly as the subject or object of a statement.

What I posted was a simple abstract syntax for RDF that allows the
representation of anything that I've personally considered RDF capable of
representing. I use this language because I haven't explored the limits of
what may or may not be encoded by such an abstract syntax. I'm sure that pat
hayes and others would have some good ideas on that topic however :-)

I apologize if I have brought up this issue out of order.

-Jonathan
Received on Friday, 22 June 2001 16:50:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:40 GMT