- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 19:18:28 -0400
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- CC: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Yeah, but this doesn't really get us off the hook. For example, you might wind up writing sentences like "rdfs:namespace is defined in the rdfs namespace" [and explaining that the range of "rdfs:namespace" *isn't* the rdfs namespace, and so on]. "Define", BTW, is used quite a lot in the Schema document; what are we going to substitute for it, since we don't know what it means? --Frank Dan Brickley wrote: > > Which is one of several reasons I wish it were just called rdfs:namespace :( > > dan > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Frank Manola wrote: > > >>Pat-- >> >>How about some suggestions for what we ought to mean by "define"? >>Especially since it's hard to avoid the use of "define" when trying to >>describe "isDefinedBy". >> >>--Frank -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 19:06:18 UTC