- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:16:42 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Two of Peter's objections concern the translation to LBase. I'm wondering whether we might defuse these objections by replacing the LBase appendix with a suitably worded informative reference to the LBase note, e.g. [[ An alternative formulation of the semantics of RDF(S) in the form of axioms for the langauge LBase can be found in the LBase specification [ref to lbase note]. ]] Brian Brian McBride wrote: > > Peter has clarified [1] the status of some of the comments he has made > on the LC semantics document: > > pfps-02 - translation to lbase - pfps notes the ball is in our court. > > pfps-03 - translation to lbase - pfps just doesn't see the need for > lbase in the document > > pfps-04 - rdf closure rules - pfps wants a stronger notion of > completeness of the closure rules > > pfps-05 - rdfs closure rules - again pfps wants a stronger notion of > completeness of the the closure rules > > pfps-06 - xml literals and LV - it is possible the latest docs fix this > and we have not pointed this out to pfps. > > Brian > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0354.html
Received on Thursday, 25 September 2003 13:19:44 UTC