- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 00:47:36 +0100
- To: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
- CC: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>, dehora@acm.org, RDFCore <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Morning chaps, M&S already contains a glossary: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2001Jun/att-0021/00-part#274 I suggest that places it firmly in scope. Brian Ron Daniel wrote: > > Bill DeHora asks: > > > > Are we within the charter to consider merging such a > [terminology] > > > document into the > > > M&S? > > As one of the self-appointed 'charter cops', I'll say > that I don't believe it violates the spirit of the charter, > so long as the terms it defines are restricted to those > used in the M&S and RDF Schema documents (modulo any > new terms added in the course of clarifying those, such > as using 'graph' to mean an instance of a 'model'). > > Ron
Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 19:50:25 UTC