- From: Peter Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:25:57 -0700
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
There was discussion in the telecon today about whether Concepts or Semantics said anything that forbade graphs names from denoting their graph. Semantics is clear that graph names might denote their graph, but there is nothing requiring this. Concepts is a bit vague on this point, saying that graph names "[do] not formally denote the graph". This could be read as forbidding the denotation, although the next sentence does clarify the situation to some extent. (It would be a bit preverse [I was watching "Dr. Strangelove" on the plane yesterday, so I'm leaving this typo in] to read the paragraph as saying that the graph name could denote anything except the graph, but there are lots of pre….s out there.) I suggest that the phrase be modified to "does not necessarily formally denote the graph". peter
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 17:26:27 UTC