RE: same-syntax extensions to RDF

Just to set the record straight...

> From: Peter Crowther 
[...]
> I find it *possible* to work with RDF *data*.  It is certainly not
> 'nice' in even the Enid Blyton sense - I find it none of 'Pleasing and
> agreeable in nature', 'Showing or requiring great precision 
> or sensitive discernment; subtle'

My apologies, I skimmed that definition.  You're right - RDF data *is*
nice to work with, as it 'requir[es] great precision [and] sensitive
discernment' - otherwise you dig yourself into a hole.

		- Peter