editorial Pat Hayes (Wednesday, 12 June)
- RE: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Markus Lanthaler (Tuesday, 11 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Ivan Herman (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Sven R.Kunze (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Friday, 14 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Friday, 14 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Friday, 14 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Friday, 14 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Saturday, 15 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Saturday, 15 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Pat Hayes (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Niklas Lindström (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Ivan Herman (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Eric Prud'hommeaux (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Sunday, 16 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Ivan Herman (Monday, 17 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Andy Seaborne (Monday, 17 June)
- Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Peter Ansell (Monday, 17 June)
- RE: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Markus Lanthaler (Monday, 17 June)
Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Peter F. Patel-Schneider (Thursday, 13 June)
Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Andy Seaborne (Monday, 17 June)
Re: [RDF-CONCEPTS] Skolemization Andy Seaborne (Monday, 17 June)
RDF's challenge Kingsley Idehen (Tuesday, 11 June)
Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment Peter Ansell (Sunday, 9 June)
- RE: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment Markus Lanthaler (Sunday, 9 June)
- Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment -- Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data David Booth (Sunday, 9 June)
- Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment -- Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data Gregg Kellogg (Sunday, 9 June)
- Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment -- Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data Manu Sporny (Monday, 10 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Pat Hayes (Wednesday, 12 June)
- RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Markus Lanthaler (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Pat Hayes (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Nathan (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Wednesday, 12 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Wednesday, 12 June)
- RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Markus Lanthaler (Thursday, 13 June)
- Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Thursday, 13 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Sven R.Kunze (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Gregg Reynolds (Tuesday, 11 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Sven R. Kunze (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Pat Hayes (Tuesday, 11 June)
RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Markus Lanthaler (Tuesday, 11 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Pat Hayes (Tuesday, 11 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Sven R.Kunze (Tuesday, 11 June)
RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Markus Lanthaler (Wednesday, 12 June)
RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Arnaud Le Hors (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Henry Story (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Pat Hayes (Wednesday, 12 June)
RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Markus Lanthaler (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) David Booth (Wednesday, 12 June)
RE: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Markus Lanthaler (Thursday, 13 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Tuesday, 11 June)
Re: The tone of the "JSON-LD vs. RDF" debate (was re: Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data) Kingsley Idehen (Tuesday, 11 June)
RE: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment -- Sub-issue on the re-definition of Linked Data Markus Lanthaler (Sunday, 9 June)
Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment Peter Ansell (Monday, 10 June)
Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment Dan Brickley (Wednesday, 12 June)
Re: bNodes as graph identifiers Peter Ansell (Monday, 3 June)
Re: bNodes as graph identifiers Andy Seaborne (Monday, 3 June)
Last message date: Sunday, 30 June 2013 15:21:22 UTC