- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 13:01:00 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Sunday, October 14, 2001, at 12:30 PM, Dan Brickley wrote: >>> RDF Schema normative >> I'd like to make sure our RDF Schema spec is short, sweet and >> easily replaceable by the specification released by the WebOnt >> WG. I think the best of doing this is split out the RDF > The (draft) Web Ont charter does not require them to produce a Schema > language for RDF, nor is it couched in terms of 'replacement'. It's a shame we have no WebOnt WG to ask about this but if "A Web ontology language, that builds on current Web languages [...] (such as RDFS)" isn't an upgraded schema language then I don't know what it is. I've not been able to get a clear definition of what distinguishes a schema language from an ontology language and all signs indicate that their the same thing. If this is true, I'd like not to confuse RDF users further by having to make them jump back and forth between the WebOnt, RDFS and DAML specs to get their jobs done. I'd like to have one document that explains it all. -- [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Sunday, 14 October 2001 14:01:04 UTC