- From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 18:14:18 -0400
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[Seth Russell]
[Tom P]
> >RDF cannot (of course)
> > express the semantics of that connection.
>
> What do you mean but that?
>
The predicate(s) will have to be defined in prose in a human-readable Rec
somewhere, right? That's what I meant.
> We need the ability to make templates now! It seems that we could agree
on
> some predicate defined in a suitable namespace and have them to use
> collectively right now ... huh ... huh?
>
I'm with you. No reason for it to be in the RDF Rec, though, any more than
the XML Namespaces Rec is in the XML 1.0 Rec. Let there be a mini-rec
"Recommendations for RDF Templates". Huh ... huh?
Cheers,
Tom P
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 18:13:30 UTC