- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 11:14:56 +0100
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> > Ah... then about this bit: > > ------- > The use of the phrase "asserted triple" in the third condition is a > deliberate weasel-worded artifact, intended to allow an RDF graph or > document to contain triples which are being used for some > non-assertional purpose. > ------- > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-mt-20020214/ > > I suggest it's time to get rid of the weasle-words. > > The most straightforward thing to do is to strike that text. > That's my preference. I second that proposal. Dark triples have now wasted a hold load of time and money. They have a cool name; and may strike Pat and Peter as a cool idea. But they are not in RDF M&S; they are not necessary; they do not clarify M&S; they are not in charter. Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 06:17:09 UTC