- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:10:20 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- cc: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Frank Manola wrote: > "Consistent machine interpretation" sure. But it seems to me you're > going beyond that, to a requirement for a machine-interpretable > definition as the basis for all this consistent machine interpretation. > As I said in an earlier message, that's something we want to move > toward, but I don't think we can throw out the older approaches quite > yet, as problematic as they may be (how do people write TCP/IP software, > for example?) OK, sounds like a reasonable position. Ultimately, the _point_ of the semantic web is general machine-machine processing. As a first step, there will certainly be a bunch of grassroots person-machine-machine stuff (eg, the foaf bits and pieces) and we don't want to discourage/deprecate the efforts of these people. Big picture, I've got a lot of sympathy for Patrick's position in general, but side with Dave & Dan on the particular issue of the primer words etc. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ Q: What's yellow and equivalent to the axiom of choice? A: Zorn's lemon.
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 12:12:24 UTC