- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 20:11:10 -0400
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- CC: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, www-rdf-logic@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
As another member of the RDFCore WG, I'd like to second the motion. At the same time, there's been a fair bit of comment on www-rdf-logic on what RDF lacks that is useful input on this particular issue (as well as both axiomatic and model-theoretic semantics that can provide a good starting point). --Frank jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote: > > Pat, > > Since http://www.daml.org/listarchive/joint-committee/ is public > and since I'm reading them from time to time, I came across > http://www.daml.org/listarchive/joint-committee/0387.html > In there, I found (among other comments) > > [[[ > It might be salutary and useful if the RDFCore were to spend some > time listening to what the ontologists want, instead of telling them > what they can have. > ]]] > > Since I am a member of the RDFCore WG I'm more than glad to listen > to the ontologists. So what do the ontologists want? > > -- > Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-8752
Received on Sunday, 13 May 2001 20:10:57 UTC