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

Re: DOCUMENT: Layering document review (was Re: UPDATE: status of longer version of layering document)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:33:09 -0500
To: Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020213083309A.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
Subject: Re: DOCUMENT: Layering document review (was Re: UPDATE: status of    longer version of layering document)
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:12:35 +0100

[...]

> option 1 is very nice but could only be chosen if at least one of the following fixes was made to RDF(S):
> 1a move rdf:type to the meta-theory
> 1b stratify RDFS 
> 1c allow for un-asserted triples in RDF
> (and perhaps 1a and 1b are the same if someone could explain it to me)
> 
> Looks like the next steps would be to get a sounding from RDF Core on 1a-c.
> If these are all out, we now where we stand.
> If at least one of these could be in, we have to choose between 1 and 3.
> 
> Frank.
>    ----

I actually would group these sub-options under option 3, that is, using RDF
syntax but modifying/ignoring the semantics.  

If the RDF Core WG is interested in changes to RDF, then good, but do we
want to wait until such changes are made?

peter
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 08:33:52 GMT

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