Re: [OEP] n-ary relations and topic maps

• From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>
• Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 10:53:07 +0100
• To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
• Message-ID: <m3acsqfn98.fsf@pavarotti.intern.opera.no>

* Christopher Welty
|
| I think I agree with the point Lars is making, which is, I think,
| that the relationship between n-ary relations in topic maps and
| "workarounds" for RDF probably doesn't belong in the n-ary relations
| note.

I was thinking this as I wrote, although I didn't explicitly write it,
so I do agree with you.
 
| So I don't think there is a need for an appendix in the n-ary
| relations note for topic maps, because that opens the door to
| arbitrarily extending the note for every other format.  If there is
| a need to describe the relationship between the workaround in the
| n-ary note and topic maps, then I think it should be in a note about
| topic maps and their relationship to RDF.

Yes.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >

Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2004 09:53:42 UTC