W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Issue timbl-03 "collection clutter" proposal to close

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 24 Apr 2003 08:28:33 -0500
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1051190912.28479.1572.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 05:22, Dave Beckett wrote:
> >>>Dan Brickley said:
> > I thought TimBL's point was that the 'this is a List' statements could
> > be inferred through knowledge of the rdfs:domain of rdf:first and 
> > rdf:rest. Anything familiar with the meaning of these rdf properties 
> > will know that they can be truly applied only to lists. In that light,
> > forcing parsers to emit this data explicitly is indeed rather redundant.
> That was just one of the points, the owl semantics / lemmas / proofs
> use rdf:List.  I can't say throw it out since I don't understand if
> they are required.  My argument stands until somebody who does tells
> me that they are required/not required for these purposes too.

No, "I don't know if they are requirement" is not a rational
argument to support "they cannot be added at a higher level".

Your argument does not stand.

> Dave
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 09:28:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:22 UTC