- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 11:17:27 +0100
- To: melnik@db.stanford.edu
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Hi Sergey, You made/make a strong inroduction! [...] > This proposal might seem radical, but I think most of the suggestions > are incremental. The features listed above (namespaces, literals, > reification etc.) are intended to be backward compatible and may be > introduced in a different order. The semantics of a language "built on > top of RDF" (like DAML/OIL) can be defined by restricting interpretation > functions used in the existing layers or by defining new ones. > Specifying "new" semantics in this way may result in a larger or smaller > number of valid interpretations. The set of statements that are subject > of semantic interpretation can be selected in an unspecified, > application-specific way. I'm trying to understand what you mean and I'm struggling with that last sentence. No matter how many times I read it, I'm not understanding it. It's in particular that set of statements subject semantic interpretation unspecified selection So what does that last sentence actually mean? -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2001 05:17:52 UTC