- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 17:02:41 +0100
- To: Thomas Baker <thomas.baker@izb.fraunhofer.de>
- Cc: SWBPD <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Thomas Baker wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 03:59:28PM +0200, NANNI Marco FTRD/DMI/SOP wrote: > >>To conclude, i think it is useless and perhaps even a bad educational >>choice to present >>RDF, RDFS and OWL as 3 (or 3 + 2) different languages each of them to be >>used for a set of problem instead of one language (OWL) with a set of >>features each of them which can be used for a set of problem. > > > Could all three be subsumed under one heading, e.g., W3C > Semantic Web Language (SWL)? > > The basic message could then be: "there is one language, > which offers different vocabularies and constructs depending > on what you want to say". > That's not made easier by the semantic differences between the languages. (Jeremy said unhelpfully) > Rather than: "there are three or more languages and this is > how they differ." > > Tom >
Received on Monday, 5 April 2004 12:07:46 UTC