W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > July 2002

proposal for templates

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 15:42:23 -0700
Message-ID: <016b01c22150$915ebac0$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>

From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>

re: http://robustai.net/mentography/arity.gif

>     [Tom P]
> > >RDF cannot (of course)
> > > express the semantics of that connection.
> >
> > What do you mean but that?
> >
>
> The predicate(s) will have to be defined in prose in a human-readable Rec
> somewhere, right?  That's what I meant.

Ok, I see what you mean.  Inevitably this particular propertry will be
defined in an app with running code ... I'm working on that as we speak.

> > We need the ability to make templates now!  It seems that we could agree
> on
> > some predicate defined in a suitable namespace and have them to use
> > collectively right now ... huh ... huh?
> >
>
> I'm with you.  No reason for it to be in the RDF Rec, though, any more
than
> the XML Namespaces Rec is in the XML 1.0 Rec.  Let there be a mini-rec
> "Recommendations for RDF Templates".  Huh ... huh?

Sure ... but  i don't see any reason to wait for a W3C Rec.  A language is
first and formost created by a group of interacting agents.  If a group of
us who want templates now get together and decide on a property name and a
namespace, then chances are our information will be interoperable when we
start publishing it.  The W3C is just going to slow us down here.  Here is
my proposal:

Namespace something like http://purl.org/properties#
Predicate name nthDomain

If there is any real interest in actually doing this collectively, I'll be
glad to write up a proposed schema document and host it somewhere for the
redirect from purl.org.

Seth Russell
http://robustai.net/sailor/
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 18:48:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:42 GMT