RE: rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr

> We both comiserated but at the time, it seemed that producing test cases
> that describe what the M+S said (not what we thought it should say) was
> the honest thing to do; this is the (spurious?) backwards-compatibility
> argument.

I find it spurious.
It is at least as honest to say that M&S does not make sense, and has not
had sense made out of it by the community.

BTW: The first version of ARP implemented my proposed resolution, but Brian
persuaded me that I should do otherwise about version 1.0.3. I probably
would have done better to have dug my heals in then.

Jeremy

Received on Thursday, 10 January 2002 11:58:41 UTC