W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: UPDATE: longer version of layering document

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 21:37:21 -0500
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020209213721F.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Subject: Re: UPDATE: longer version of layering document
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 15:41:45 +0100

> >PS:  Here are (most of) my proposed changes to RDF:
> >1/ Move rdf:type out of the theory into the metatheory
> >2/ Remove reification.
> >3/ Remove containers.
> >4/ Remove several syntax abbreviations.
> >I want 2 and 3 removed because they don't have appropriate meaning. I want
> >4 removed because it interferes with the correspondence between RDF and
> >XML. I want 1 moved because it causes semantic paradoxes in more-powerful
> >formalisms.
> 
> 1/ could you clarify? i.e. how would a theory a la
>    http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules.n3 be impacted?
> 2/ RDFCore should clarify e.g. http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfr-theory.n3
> 2/ RDFCore should clarify
> 4/ such as?
> 
> --
> Jos

1/ Well, it would just about be trashed completely.   :-)
   Moving rdf:type out of the theory changes just about everything.

4/ Well, the abbreviation that breaks striping is particularly problematic
   when considering XML compatability.  This abbreviation changes the
   meaning of RDF/XML in a particularly hard-to-account-for way.

peter
Received on Saturday, 9 February 2002 21:38:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:47 GMT