W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2001

Re: datatypes and MT (#rdfms-graph)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:39:40 -0600
Message-ID: <3BF15ADC.C705DB1C@w3.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Brian McBride wrote:
> Pat Hayes wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > I thought we had a kind of working consensus to use the graph as the
> > 'primary' syntax.
> We have more than that.  We have a decision made at the F2F
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20010801-f2f/#decisions

There are several decisions there. Which one are you referring to?
This one?

"The model theory will be defined for RDF graphs, not n-triples."

Are you suggesting that issues #rdfms-graph is actually closed,
then? I don't think it's clear what an "RDF graph" is at all.
I think that's what we're discussing. I'm suggesting this
as a definition of an RDF graph:

                constants (URIs w/fragids)
                string literals
                bnodes (existentially quantified variables)
                term term term.

	-- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0030.html

I believe that discussion on this issue is still in order.
Please confirm or clarify why not.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2001 12:42:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:06 UTC