Friday, 1 September 2000
Thursday, 31 August 2000
- Re: RDF: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- Social ramifications of RDF
- Re: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- RE: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- Re: Discussion-Paper: A Logical Interpretation of RDF
- Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: Redland 0.9.3
- Website Optimization.net top search engine ranking
- Re: RDF: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- Re: RDF: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- ANNOUNCEMENT: Redland 0.9.3
Wednesday, 30 August 2000
- Re: Parsers and rdf:Description
- Re: RDF: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- RDF: better syntax effort - who could contribute?
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- yasq (yet another syntax question)
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- FlowerFunds - Fund Raising Program
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- Request for review: CC/PP specifications
- Re: M&S/Parser question
Tuesday, 29 August 2000
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- Re: Instant RDF
- Harvesting RDF triples from xlink
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- Re: M&S/Parser question
- M&S/Parser question
- remove
- remove
- DC Records in RDF
Monday, 28 August 2000
- Re: SV: SV: Instant RDF - Panopolies
- Re: Jena - A Java API for RDF
- RE: Update to XLink -> RDF mapping
- SV: SV: Instant RDF - Panopolies
- SV: SV: Instant RDF - Panopolies
- RE: Discussion-Paper: A Logical Interpretation of RDF
- Jena - A Java API for RDF
- Re: Update to XLink -> RDF mapping
Sunday, 27 August 2000
Saturday, 26 August 2000
- syntax question
- Re: Discussion-Paper: A Logical Interpretation of RDF
- Semantic Web Workshop: Call for Participation
- Discussion-Paper: A Logical Interpretation of RDF
Friday, 25 August 2000
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- SiRPAC work
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: SV: Instant RDF
- Re: SV: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- SV: Instant RDF
- SV: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- RE: Instant RDF
- RE: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
Thursday, 24 August 2000
- Re: Instant RDF
- RE: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Re: Instant RDF
- Instant RDF
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- Re: subPropertyOf
- Most Important W.W.II MICROFILM Collection: Newspapers
Wednesday, 23 August 2000
Tuesday, 22 August 2000
- Re: Parsers and rdf:Description
- Open Directory Project -- J2EE
- Re: Parsers and rdf:Description
- Announcement: rdfpic program to manage PhotoRDF
- Re: Parsers and rdf:Description
- Parsers and rdf:Description
- Re: Announcing RDFdb
- Pet Tag Program For shelters and Rescue groups.
Monday, 21 August 2000
Sunday, 20 August 2000
Friday, 18 August 2000
- Re: how fast is fast
- how fast is fast
- Re: Announcing RDFdb
- Re: Announcing RDFdb
- Re: Announcing RDFdb
- Re: Announcing RDFdb
- RE: A certain difficulty
- Re: Announcing RDFdb
- ANNOUNCEMENT: Redland - An RDF Application Framework
- must properties be of the form foo#bar
Thursday, 17 August 2000
Tuesday, 15 August 2000
Monday, 14 August 2000
- Win32 implementation of RDFDB ?
- RSS 1.0 Specification Proposal
- Documentation Specialist Seeking Contract Work
Sunday, 13 August 2000
- Re: lists and other facts and rules in RDF
- XML in RDF in XML via XSLT: an infoset implementation
- Re: lists and other facts and rules in RDF
Saturday, 12 August 2000
Friday, 11 August 2000
- [www-rdf-interest] <none>
- RE: lists and other facts and rules in RDF
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.
- Re: lists and other facts and rules in RDF
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- lists and other facts and rules in RDF
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
Thursday, 10 August 2000
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? and line-oriented XML
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- RE: domain and range of "domain"
- Re: Draft RDF model for P3P.
- RE: domain and range of "domain"
- Re: domain and range of "domain"
- RE: Draft RDF model for P3P.
- domain and range of "domain"
Wednesday, 9 August 2000
Tuesday, 8 August 2000
- libwww RDF parser patch
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- Draft RDF model for P3P.
- First NSF - DELOS Workshop "Information Seeking, Searching and Querying in Digital Libraries"
- [Fwd: DRH2000]
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'?
Monday, 7 August 2000
- RE: Java API
- RE: Java API
- ENCOMPASS2000 WORKSHOP Timetables
- Re: Java API
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'?
Sunday, 6 August 2000
Saturday, 5 August 2000
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
Friday, 4 August 2000
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- Java API
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'?
- Re: RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
- RDF syntax 'improvements'? - was RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed.]
Thursday, 3 August 2000
- semantic web & structured data portals
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
Tuesday, 1 August 2000
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification nee ded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification nee ded.]
- access and reference to WordNet classes/links
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- RE: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification nee ded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]
- Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]