- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 07:18:48 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On Tuesday 25. January 2011 17:49:24 Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: > Also. As a result of internal discussion and comments regarding this > term, the current editor's draft replaces 'RDF knowledge' with 'RDF > graph content' and I will be using this latter terminology in > subsequent parts of this email. That's a better term, but I feel that we should first identify the audience of this spesification. Is it the thousands of developers who could implement this, or is it a foundational document that other authors could use to document how it should be done for the former group? Honestly, I think that the current document is both too opaque and not sufficiently specified to be useful to developers, but I also feel that the current discussion is interesting and important. Best, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Ph.d Research Fellow, Semantic Web kjetil@kjernsmo.net http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 06:19:36 UTC