Re: RDFS versioning

> Looked at in a certain way, this is a very, very good thing. If A
> moves to schema aa and expects to be able to converse with B
> using schema a,

Don't forget that the SW aim is that eventually both A and B can
convert their systems from using "a" schema to "aa" schema
automtically by semantic botostrapping.

O.K.... let's say A uses "a", and B uses "a". Now, C comes along with
"aa". A tries to read something of C's (written in aa), but can't.
Luckily either the aa schema has assertions about how it relates to
"a", allowing A and B to upgrade, or these assertions are found in a
third party index (ahem...SWAG...ahem).

Versioning is good... but I thought that part of the SW was how to get
around versioning?

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <> .
[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <> .

Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 10:29:12 UTC