- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:32:00 +0000
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- CC: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, Michael Nelson <mln@cs.odu.edu>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Nathan wrote: > timestamp the predicate in a triple. > > please do tell me the flaw in my thinking. > scrap that, sorry for the noise, doesn't cater for indicating data has been removed however point remains that perhaps synchronisation (date or version) data should perhaps be in the RDF rather than outside the scope of rdf?
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 11:32:54 UTC