- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 30 May 2002 10:31:43 -0500
- To: "Peter F. "Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: danbri@w3.org, bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-rdf-comments@w3.org, em@w3.org, w3c-semweb-cg@w3.org
On Thu, 2002-05-30 at 10:26, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: [...] > I'm only interested in relationships between RDF graphs. Which such > relationships are RDF relationships? > > My view is that the only such relationships are RDF entailment and RDFS > entailment. Any agent that computes any other relationship between RDF > graphs is not doing RDF. Why is RDFS special? It's just the first of many RDF vocabularies, no? I could understand a definition that said 'anybody doing more than RDF simple entailments isn't doing RDF', but I don't understand a definition of RDF that includes RDFS but not dublin core, RSS, DAML+OIL/OWL, etc. > (Well, actually, I suppose that an agent could be > determining whether two RDF graphs RDF entail each other, which is > different from RDF entailment, but I think that you should be able to get > my drift.) > > peter -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 11:32:12 UTC