- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:44:58 -0500
- To: "Gerd Wagner" <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>
- Cc: "'Chris Welty'" <cawelty@gmail.com>, "'Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
> >> Justifying slotted syntax based on RDF makes little sense to me
>
> But there is a clear sense of slots in RDF descriptions.
> Consider, e.g., the following description (in some fictitious
> RDF syntax):
>
> description about=RIF
> type=W3C-WorkingGroup
> startdate=2005
> chairs={CW,CSMA}
> progress=slow
>
> > I don't know where that requirement came from, I found it odd when I
> > first read it, too, but note that RDF does NOT have a relational
> > semantics.
>
> Sure, but the concept of slots does not depend on relational semantics.
> And it's clear (I hope not only to me) that the OO/(RD)F-Logic concept
> of slots is more important to RIF that the relational one.
+1 (and that matches my understanding of that text in the charter)
-- Sandro
Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:45:14 UTC