- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:02:48 -0500
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Brian McBride wrote: > > At 12:21 28/10/2002 -0500, Frank Manola wrote: > >I still like my formulation: > > So do I, its pretty close to my suggestion. The difficulty I have is that > the sentence in the primer does not make it clear whether it's the RDF > information thats in the web or the resources that the information is about > or both. That's a healthy ambiguity in my opinion; at least through the end of the first sentence! Resolving this ambiguity (which is sort of built into what we're doing in some respects) in one sentence is a laudable goal, but I really did try to clarify this in the next few sentences. Oh well, I suppose it's fair if *all* the editors have to change something! Let me suggest something else: if we're going to standardize things across documents, how about we standardize the way we do references: e.g., * for the Model Theory, Dave and I have [RDF-MODEL] and Concepts has [RDF-SEMANTICS], * for RDF/XML, I have [RDF-XML] and Concepts has [RDF-SYNTAX], * for Schema, I have [RDF-SCHEMA] and Dave and Concepts have [RDF-VOCABULARY], * Dave and I have [RDF-MS] as a normative reference and Concepts has it as an informational reference, * etc. etc. --Frank -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-8752
Received on Monday, 28 October 2002 13:06:45 UTC