- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:49:25 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>, pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 16:59 25/06/2002 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote: >At 10:19 AM 6/25/02 -0500, pat hayes wrote: >>I fail to follow why this kind of example would lead you to that >>conclusion. BUt in any case there are other strong reasons for not coming >>to that conclusion, which we have gone over now several times. If there >>is any way to assert darkness, then there is no way, in practice, to >>avoid nonmonotonicity. ... > >You say _no_ way, but I thought that a syntax extension (in the graph >syntax) was a possibility. I agree it has the other disadvantages you >mention, but I want to be clear what our *possible* choices are. I thought we made this choice at the face to face. The deciding factor as I recall was the argument that we did not want to burden users with having to remember which triples to darken. Brian
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 09:50:49 UTC