Re: URIs, used in RDF, that do not have associated documentation from David Booth on 2012-04-01 (www-tag@w3.org from April 2012)

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 12:13:35 -0400
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: Tore Eriksson <tore.eriksson@gmail.com>, トーレエリクソン <tore.eriksson@po.rd.taisho.co.jp>, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, www-tag@w3.org, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Message-ID: <1333296815.2181.99327.camel@dbooth-laptop>

On Sun, 2012-04-01 at 10:55 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
> [ . . . ]  But HTTP does not concern itself with what these messages
> are *about*. Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying it should. After all,
> it is a transfer protocol, not an ontology language. Which is exactly
> my point. 

+1


-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.

Received on Sunday, 1 April 2012 16:14:01 UTC