- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 12:51:26 -0500
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EECD69E.6060907@openlinksw.com>
On 12/17/11 12:21 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > That is why we are stuck. This situation cannot be resolved simply by letting it all hang out. We could simply declare that RDF has no semantics, and is simply to be used by programmers to mess around with in ways they find handy. Really, this might be the best way to move forward. But until we do this, we have to take the semantics seriously. +1 This is the riddle, fundamentally. RDF, SPARQL, and Linked Data (an optional application of SPARQL and RDF to the matter of InterWeb scale structured data via directed graphs) should be loosely coupled. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder& CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Saturday, 17 December 2011 17:52:40 UTC