- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 00:20:40 +0200
- To: "Hogan, Aidan" <aidan.hogan@deri.org>
- Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, semantic-web@w3.org, Alejandro Mallea <janoma@gmail.com>
<:John> <:telephone> _:b1 and <:John> <:telephone> _:b2. correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't it also be _:b1 :number "123" . _:b2 :number "123" . On 18 June 2011 20:56, Hogan, Aidan <aidan.hogan@deri.org> wrote: > Thanks to everybody who has participated in the poll so far. > > We would again prefer people who have not answered the poll (but who > intend to) to please fill it in *before* reading on. > > Link to Poll: http://db.ing.puc.cl/amallea/blank-nodes-poll > > Thanks! > > ... > > David, Jonathan, > > We thank you for your feedback, but we explicitly requested that the > email was not to be replied to on-list: > > """to avoid influencing responses, we would strongly prefer if > this email is not replied to on-list. If you want to leave feedback, > please do so in the space provided in the poll, or reply directly to > Alejandro (CC'ed on this mail) and Aidan".""" > > This was a simple request. > > Of course, it's a public mailing list, and you're free to respond if you > feel the need. Again however, we would *strongly prefer* if feedback is > given in the space provided or emailed directly to us off-list. > > We are now in a difficult position. Since the concerns have been made > on-list, we now feel that we need to address them, in kind, on-list: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jonathan Rees [mailto:jar@creativecommons.org] >> Sent: 18 June 2011 02:59 >> >> Your set of answers for question 1 does not include the one specified >> by RDF semantics. >> >> Namely, that John has a telephone number (which we may or may not > know). >> >> So, if one's wishes and intent are to follow the recommendation (whose >> purpose, of course, is to enable mutual intelligibility), there is no >> way to answer. >> > > @Jonathan, you are of course correct in terms of how blank-nodes should > be interpreted according to RDF Semantics. But, that's explicitly what > the poll is *not* asking about. At the top of the poll (and in the > original email), we state: > > """Note that the poll is trying to determine what you intend > when you publish blank nodes. It is not a quiz on RDF Semantics. There > is no correct answer.""" > > Your proposed option: > > "John has a telephone number (which we may or may not know)" > > is, of course, formally correct in terms of *interpretation* when > consuming the data, but is not meaningful as an *intent* when > publishing. In reality, publishers do not say to themselves "I may or > may not know the value of X, therefore I shall publish this as a > blank-node". > > Purely in terms of concrete publishing *intent*, we firmly believe that > for our question, our option: > > "John has a telephone number, but we don't know the number." > > makes more sense, speaking directly to the question we want answered. > You may or may not agree, but please try to see this from our point of > view. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David Booth [mailto:david@dbooth.org] >> Sent: 18 June 2011 03:46 >> >> And, quite annoyingly: (a) the server refuses to show the poll again > if >> it thinks you have already submitted an answer; and (b) it seems to >> think that everyone in the same local area network is the same person! >> >> David > > @David, apologies. The poll is based on Drupal and filters multiple > responses based on IP addresses. We'll look into making the poll > viewable to people who have already responded (thanks for doing so). As > for the LAN issue, we're not sure if we can do anything there. > > Cheers, > Aidan and Alejandro > > [1] http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldrums148142.html > > > -- http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2011 22:21:08 UTC