W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Danbri's writeup regarding rdf:value (ISSUE-27)

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 17:06:09 +0100
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Message-Id: <E76F13BE-42D3-49CD-A297-F9658EE85431@cyganiak.de>
To: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
This is a housekeeping reply in order to file Dan's very useful link under ISSUE-27 (“Should we deprecate rdf:value?” [1]).

On 10 Apr 2011, at 16:05, Dan Brickley wrote:
> I made a fairly lengthy writeup of this
> last year, filed under 'rdf:value', in anticipation of such WG
> discussions.  Details at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Jul/0252.html
> The M+S reification vocab is supposed to for describing statements
> without them necessarily also being asserted; so using its 'rdf:value'
> as part of a pattern for making n-ary claims was just downright
> confusing.
> Ah well, better luck this time.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/27
Received on Sunday, 10 April 2011 16:06:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:58 UTC