- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:17:48 +0200
- To: Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
- Cc: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, public-xg-lld@w3.org
On 14 September 2011 16:05, Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 08:25:07PM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: >> Tom, I think it depends on the context, and "the" works for me in >> that case. Here's the opening line of the RDF primer: >> >> "The Resource Description Framework (RDF) is a language for >> representing information about resources in the World Wide Web." >> >> The way it feels to me, "RDF" can stand alone but "Resource >> Description Framework" needs "the" -- because you wouldn't say "such >> as framework". And, no, I cannot cite any grammar rule to back this >> up. > > I buy that; the opening sentence of the primer is a good example to follow. Yes, it's *the* Resource Description Framework. We don't count the revisions to W3C's approach as new Frameworks, or anything like that. And we _don't_ say that each domain model / vocabulary / schema / ontology is a distinct 'resource description framework'. There's only one such "Framework", described by a growing pile of specs and implemented by a growing pile of tools. > Undone [1]. > > Tom > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Scope&action=edit&undoafter=6431&undo=6438 > > -- > Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org> > >
Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2011 14:18:21 UTC