- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:08:27 +0200
- To: "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
We seem to be talking past each other and I seem to be completely failing to communicate anything of value, so I'll not continue this particular thread. Patrick [Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com] ----- Original Message ----- From: "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org> To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> Cc: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>; "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org> Sent: 11 December, 2002 16:06 Subject: Re: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer > The problem you see with isDefinedBy etc., won't be any different when > it comes to application vocabularies. xyz:Document, abc:Person, def:Event, etc. > > Yet we're still encouraging people to go create schemas for such > things and use them. Do you believe their classes and properties > to be 'meaningless'?
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2002 04:09:01 UTC