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

RE: timbl-03 collection clutter

From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 13:36:16 +0100
Message-Id: <>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

At 11:40 07/05/2003 +0100, Brian McBride wrote:
>So I'm confused.
>Are we all agreed that the only reason to keep the rdf:type rdf:List 
>triples would be if webont needed them?

I'm not currently aware of any other.

>DanC: the cost of updating the Owl specs to not require the extra type 
>triples is 'considerable'.
>PatH: It bet its not.
>Jos: we can easily add/remove them as needed, so add them when needed.
>Jeremy: we can easily add/remove them as needed. Its more aesthetic to 
>remove them when not.
>PatH - you bet its trivial to change Owl not to need them - can you 
>propose specific text for the change?
>Question:  Which Owl needs them?
>The purpose of a specification is to enable the development of maximally 
>interoperable implementations.  Personally, I don't understand why we have 
>to be so dogmatic about whether these triples are generated by a parser or 
>not.  Can't we just encourage developers to offer control over whether or 
>not they are produced?  Tim gets what he needs - no generation of 
>unnecessary triples.  Pfps gets what he wants - no change.

I think that we need to be dogmatic to the extent that
(a) the syntax specification states what (minimum) triples are generated 
from some RDF/XML input, and
(b) the semantics specification states what a collection of triples means,
such that taken together they give a complete account of what some given 
RDF/XML means as RDF(S).

Beyond that, and here I think I agree with you, I think it's up to layered 
specifications to "condition" the RDF graph in any way they may need to 
ensure that the layered semantics work out as desired.


Graham Klyne
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 09:34:00 UTC

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