- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:08:06 +0300
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Jeremy: >>The LC text does not claim that the RDF representation is equivalent, merely >>that it is an expression of, an n-place predicate or a n-column table. ??? >>The primer does not deal with this problem, which is why I thought we had >>this text in the first place. Graham: >I'm not sure, now, what "this problem" is, that is not covered by the >proposed revised text. As I saw it the LC text was intended to indicate one way to migrate legacy relational data into RDF. I had considered proposing to cut this text completely when I reworked the example a couple of releases ago. I decided against on the basis that relational data is the most important type of legacy data, yet the topic is slightly beyond the primer treatment. Nothing Peter says seems relevant to that judgement. While I am not particularly attached to this baby see your proposed changes as throwing it out with the bathwater. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 11 April 2003 03:07:46 UTC