- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 12:22:24 +0000
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 9 Nov 2012, at 12:01, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > Since there's agreement [1] Well, this is an Editor's Draft, and this is fresh text that hasn't been reviewed > that "any web document that has an RDF-bearing representation may be considered a g-box" does it not imply that a g-box is just an RDF document? The sentence says that every RDF document is a g-box. This doesn't mean that every g-box is an RDF document. There could be other kinds of things that “contain” RDF graphs. Better not tie the notion of a mutable RDF container quite so tightly to the notion of publishing a document, IMO. Best, Richard > > Link > > 1. http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#change-over-time . > > -- > > 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 > > > > >
Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 12:22:57 UTC