www-rdf-logic@w3.org from May 2001 by date

Thursday, 31 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want Bill Andersen
• Re: Predicates and Arcs vs Triples RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Bill Andersen
• RDF model revisited, or: How to make the most out of Reifications and Containers Wolfram Conen
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Predicates and Arcs vs Triples RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object Graham Klyne
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: The Mel99 semantics for RDF Sergey Melnik
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sergey Melnik

Wednesday, 30 May 2001

• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Bill Andersen
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Stefan Decker
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Seth Russell
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman pat hayes
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Je'ro^me Euzenat

Tuesday, 29 May 2001

• Re: Predicates and Arcs vs Triples RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object pat hayes
• Re: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] pat hayes
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman pat hayes
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Drew McDermott
• RE: Predicates and Arcs vs Triples RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object Jonathan Borden

Monday, 28 May 2001

• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Sunday, 27 May 2001

• RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Graham Klyne
• Re: Predicates and Arcs vs Triples RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object Graham Klyne

Monday, 28 May 2001

• Re: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object[was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Dan Connolly

Sunday, 27 May 2001

• RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Jonathan Borden
• Predicates and Arcs vs Triples RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object Jonathan Borden
• RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Graham Klyne
• Proposal revisited: RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object... Jonathan Borden
• RE: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Jonathan Borden
• RE: Theoretical view of order Ziv Hellman
• Re: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Graham Klyne
• Theoretical view of order Graham Klyne
• Re: CG: Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? John F. Sowa

Saturday, 26 May 2001

• Re: use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Danny Ayers
• use/mention and reification: rdf:predicate/subject/object [was: RDF Abstract Syntax...] Dan Connolly
• RE: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Danny Ayers
• Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Seth Russell
• RE: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Jonathan Borden
• RE: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Ziv Hellman
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Dan Connolly
• Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Bill Andersen

Friday, 25 May 2001

• Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Seth Russell

Saturday, 26 May 2001

• RE: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Jonathan Borden
• RE: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Jonathan Borden

Friday, 25 May 2001

• Re: Currying pat hayes
• Currying Graham Klyne
• RE: CG: Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Danny Ayers
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Drew McDermott
• RE: CG: Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Emery, Pat
• Re: RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman David Allsopp
• Re: CG: Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? John F. Sowa

Thursday, 24 May 2001

• RDF Abstract Syntax: a strawman Jonathan Borden
• RE: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Emery, Pat
• Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? pat hayes
• Re: N3 vs. XML jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: The Unique Names Assumption + RDF Layer 1 as Restricted FOL pat hayes
• Re: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Seth Russell
• Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Seth Russell
• RE: Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Emery, Pat
• Is the meaning of order intrinsic ? Seth Russell
• Re: metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Sandro Hawke
• Re: N3 vs. XML Drew McDermott
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: Not-subClassOf Peter Crowther
• RE: Not-subClassOf jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Larry Masinter

Wednesday, 23 May 2001

• RE: Not-subClassOf Emery, Pat
• Re: Not-subClassOf jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Re: Not-subClassOf Sean B. Palmer
• RE: Not-subClassOf jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Jena bug fixed Brian McBride
• RE: Not-subClassOf Balon, Corey
• RE: Not-subClassOf Balon, Corey
• Re: N3 vs. XML jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Ziv Hellman

Tuesday, 22 May 2001

• Re: Not-subClassOf Sean B. Palmer

Wednesday, 23 May 2001

• Re: Not-subClassOf jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Tuesday, 22 May 2001

• Re: Not-subClassOf Sean B. Palmer
• Re: Not-subClassOf jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: N3 vs. XML Drew McDermott
• Re: N3 vs. XML Dan Connolly
• Re: N3 vs. XML (rdf:parseType) Graham Klyne
• Re: metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Dan Connolly
• RE: N3 vs. XML Emery, Pat
• Re: N3 vs. XML (rdf:parseType) Dan Connolly
• Re: metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Drew McDermott
• RE: N3 vs. XML jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Re: DAML+OIL bug Dan Connolly
• Re: N3 vs. XML jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Re: DAML+OIL bug Drew McDermott
• RE: N3 vs. XML Peter Crowther
• Re: N3 vs. XML Drew McDermott
• Re: N3 vs. XML David Allsopp
• Problem with 'not' (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Drew McDermott
• Re: N3 vs. XML Graham Klyne
• RE: URIs as names (was: What do the ontologists want) Jonathan Borden
• Re: N3 vs. XML David Allsopp
• RE: What do the ontologists want Ziv Hellman

Monday, 21 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want Frank Manola
• Re: The Unique Names Assumption + RDF Layer 1 as Restricted FOL Sandro Hawke
• Re: metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• metadata vs. meta-(meta)-data Larry Masinter
• Re: What do the ontologists want Frank Manola
• Re: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne
• RE: What do the ontologists want Peter Crowther
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jim Hendler
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: N3 vs. XML Graham Klyne
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne
• Re: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Ziv Hellman

Sunday, 20 May 2001

• RE: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne

Monday, 21 May 2001

• Re: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) David Allsopp
• Re: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want David Allsopp
• Re: N3 vs. XML David Allsopp
• Re: What do the ontologists want David Allsopp
• The Unique Names Assumption + RDF Layer 1 as Restricted FOL Sandro Hawke

Sunday, 20 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• Re: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Stefan Decker
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Ziv Hellman
• Re: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• Re: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: What do the ontologists want dehora
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Ziv Hellman
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Ziv Hellman
• RE: What do the ontologists want Miles Sabin
• RE: What do the ontologists want Miles Sabin
• correction (was: RE: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• Re: URIs as names (was: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: Ontologies =?= Languages pat hayes
• URIs as names (was: What do the ontologists want) Larry Masinter
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Saturday, 19 May 2001

• RE: What do the ontologists want Dan Brickley
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• Re: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• Desirata for Symbols (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Ziv Hellman
• RE: Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Ziv Hellman
• RE: What do the ontologists want dehora
• Re: What do the ontologists want jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Ontologies =?= Languages Sandro Hawke
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Layering (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: DAML+OIL bug Dan Connolly
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want Danny Ayers

Friday, 18 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want Seth Russell

Saturday, 19 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Re: N3 vs. XML Sandro Hawke

Friday, 18 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want Seth Russell

Saturday, 19 May 2001

• Re: N3 vs. XML jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Friday, 18 May 2001

• Re: N3 vs. XML Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want Jim Hendler
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Stefan Decker
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Interoperability (Was: what do ontologists want?) pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Stephen Reed
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• Re: What do the ontologists want Seth Russell
• Re: W3C will again cast pearls (was :RE: What do the ontologists want) pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• N3 vs. XML Drew McDermott
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Drew McDermott
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Why Triples? (was Re: What do the ontologists want) Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Seth Russell
• RE: What do the ontologists want Danny Ayers
• Re: Alternative RDF Syntaxes (n3, ...) Sean B. Palmer
• RE: What do the ontologists want jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• RE: What do the ontologists want Ziv Hellman
• Re: Alternative RDF Syntaxes (n3, ...) jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• W3C will again cast pearls (was :RE: What do the ontologists want) Danny Ayers
• RE: What do the ontologists want Danny Ayers
• Re: What do the ontologists want Seth Russell
• Re: Alternative RDF Syntaxes (n3, ...) Sean B. Palmer
• RE: What do the ontologists want jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Alternative RDF Syntaxes (n3, ...) Sandro Hawke
• RE: What do the ontologists want Ziv Hellman
• Re: The Mel99 semantics for RDF Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: The Mel99 semantics for RDF Dan Connolly
• RE: What do the ontologists want Emery, Pat
• RE: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne
• Re: The Mel99 semantics for RDF Graham Klyne
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: What do the ontologists want Wilson, MD (Michael)
• RE: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• RE: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Surface vs. Abstract Syntax, was: RE: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want David Allsopp
• RE: What do the ontologists want Peter Crowther
• Re: What do the ontologists want jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: The Mel99 semantics for RDF Dan Connolly
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want dehora
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Thursday, 17 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Stefan Decker
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sandro Hawke
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sergey Melnik
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Sets, Nodes and Types was: Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Drew McDermott
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Jonathan Borden
• Re: Set Theory (NBG) John D. Ramsdell
• RE: What do the ontologists want Emery, Pat
• RE: Set Theory (NBG) Ziv Hellman
• Re: What do the ontologists want Drew McDermott
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Drew McDermott
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Drew McDermott
• Re: What do the ontologists want Dan Brickley
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• Re: The Mel99 semantics for RDF Graham Klyne
• Set Theory (NBG) John D. Ramsdell
• Re: What do the ontologists want Dan Connolly
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: What do the ontologists want David Allsopp
• Re: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• useful reification Danny Ayers
• Re: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne
• Progress (was: What do the ontologists want) Graham Klyne
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jim Hendler
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Jim Hendler
• Re: What do the ontologists want Bill Andersen
• Re: What do the ontologists want Dan Connolly
• The Mel99 semantics for RDF Dan Connolly
• Re: What do the ontologists want Sean B. Palmer
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes

Wednesday, 16 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want Seth Russell
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Brian McBride
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Dan Connolly
• RE: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: What do the ontologists want Ziv Hellman
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Re: DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: What do the ontologists want Charles F. Munat
• DAML ObjectProp vs DatatypeProp Drew McDermott
• Re: What do the ontologists want Drew McDermott
• Re: What do the ontologists want Dan Brickley
• RE: What do the ontologists want Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: What do the ontologists want? David Allsopp
• RE: What do the ontologists want dehora
• Re: What do the ontologists want Dan Connolly
• Re: What do the ontologists want (what URIs denote) Dan Connolly
• RE: What do the ontologists want Charles F. Munat
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want Charles F. Munat
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want (what URIs denote) pat hayes

Tuesday, 15 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden

Wednesday, 16 May 2001

• Re: What do the ontologists want? jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Tuesday, 15 May 2001

• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Jim Hendler
• RE: What do the ontologists want Marcelo Tallis
• Re: What do the ontologists want? pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want? pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want Charles F. Munat
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Uche Ogbuji
• Re: What do the ontologists want? pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want tim finin
• Re: What do the ontologists want (what URIs denote) Dan Connolly
• DAML+OIL bug Drew McDermott
• RE: What do the ontologists want Miles Sabin
• Re: What do the ontologists want Leo Obrst
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Seth Russell
• Re: What do the ontologists want Uche Ogbuji
• RE: What do the ontologists want Miles Sabin
• Re: What do the ontologists want Uche Ogbuji
• Re: What do the ontologists want (what URIs denote) pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want? Graham Klyne
• Re: What do the ontologists want Graham Klyne
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Uche Ogbuji
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want? pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want? Danny Ayers
• Re: What do the ontologists want Uche Ogbuji
• Re: What do the ontologists want (what URIs denote) Dan Connolly
• Re: What do the ontologists want? tim finin
• Re: What do the ontologists want tim finin
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Uche Ogbuji
• Re: What do the ontologists want pat hayes
• RE: What do the ontologists want? Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want? David Allsopp
• RE: What do the ontologists want? Peter Crowther
• RE: What do the ontologists want Dickinson, Ian J
• Re: What do the ontologists want Jonathan Borden

Monday, 14 May 2001

• Last CfP: Foundations of Models for Information Integration workshop (FMII-2001) Enrico Franconi
• Re: What do the ontologists want? pat hayes
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Jonathan Borden
• Reified Statements Using Restrictions Sean B. Palmer
• RE: What do the ontologists want? Ron Daniel
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: What do the ontologists want? Jonathan Borden
• Re: What do the ontologists want? Frank Manola

Saturday, 12 May 2001

• What do the ontologists want? jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

Friday, 11 May 2001

• Re: Cyclic Classes/Properties Sigfrid Lundberg, Lub NetLab
• RE: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] Sigfrid Lundberg, Lub NetLab
• Re: Cyclic Classes/Properties Enrico Franconi
• RE: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] Peter Crowther
• Re: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] Sigfrid Lundberg, Lub NetLab

Thursday, 10 May 2001

• Re: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] pat hayes
• Semantic Web Mining - Workshop at ECML/PKDD Siegfried Handschuh
• Ontologies Workshop - Call for Papers Siegfried Handschuh

Sunday, 6 May 2001

• Re: RDF semantics: applications, formalism and education Graham Klyne

Monday, 7 May 2001

• concrete types and inference Brian McBride

Sunday, 6 May 2001

• Re: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] Sean B. Palmer
• RE: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: ...] Peter Crowther
• RE: Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] Peter Crowther
• Re: RDF semantics: applications, formalism and education Graham Klyne

Saturday, 5 May 2001

• Cyclic Classes/Properties [was: Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub] Sean B. Palmer
• Re: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub Sean B. Palmer
• RE: DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub Danny Ayers
• DAML Correction: Same Is Not A Sub Of Sub Sean B. Palmer

Friday, 4 May 2001

• Re: relational mapping? Seth Russell
• Contexts, Axioms and Definitions in RDF(S) Alexandre Delteil
• Re: relational mapping? Nick Bassiliades
• Re: relational mapping? Jan Grant

Thursday, 3 May 2001

• RE: relational mapping? Danny Ayers
• RE: relational mapping? Danny Ayers
• Re: relational mapping? Seth Russell
• RE: relational mapping? Andrew Hill
• Re: relational mapping? Jan Grant
• Re: relational mapping? Seth Russell
• Re: relational mapping? Jan Grant
• relational mapping? Danny Ayers

Tuesday, 1 May 2001

• Re: Range interpretation question. Wolfram Conen

Last message date: Thursday, 31 May 2001 12:15:12 UTC