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

Re: Resolution of: #rdfms-identity-anon-resources

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 05:54:45 -0400 (EDT)
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0110150553410.12191-100000@tux.w3.org>
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Graham Klyne wrote:

> With respect to the "anon-resources" issue and telecon discussion, I'd like
> to stand back from the words.
> At the F2F in Sebastopol, I thought it was clearly stated by members of the
> original RDF WG that the *intent* of <rdf:Description ...> without
> 'rdf:id=...' or 'rdf:about=...' was to assert the existence of a resource
> with given properties without identifying the resource.

This is how I remember it, and consistent with the meeting record.


> The discussion help then and subsequently seemed, to me, to indicate that
> the current group felt that this is a reasonable requirement and
> interpretation.
> (This discussion included some analysis of different options, led by
> Sergey, using a subset of FOL to analyze the consequences of this and other
> interpretations.  I think there was also some exploration of use-cases,
> though I don't now recall the details.)
> My text was an attempt to reflect this, but it seems to me that before
> debating my text we need to agree on the general thrust and intent here.  I
> think that was questioned in last Friday's  telecon, so needs to be reviewed.
> #g
Received on Monday, 15 October 2001 05:54:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:05 UTC