- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:49:52 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Frank Manola wrote: > I seem to recall Tim Bray, among others, not being > overly disturbed about this situation. Again calling on my memory, I > believe he thinks additional descriptive information *about* the URIref > as being a way to handle this, and I think he has a point. About the uriref (or about the resource node labelled with it), I was thinking along much the same line. > What you might consider doing as a thought-experiment is thinking > about what text you would like to see in RDF documents that fully > resolves this issue to your satisfaction, and then thinking about > whether the rest of the W3C would think it an appropriate action of the > RDF Core WG to appear to commit the W3C to those things in its > specifications. Alternatively, if you can come up with text that at > least identifies the issue more clearly than what we currently say, we > could certainly consider inserting it in appropriate documents during > Last Call. Cheers, Frank, I'm certainly thinking about that. > One man's opinion. And an astonishingly reasonable one at that. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ ( echo "ouroboros"; cat ) > /dev/fd/0 # it's like talking to yourself sometimes
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 07:51:54 UTC