- From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 13:04:29 +0000
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
On March 20, Brian McBride writes: > At 13:41 19/03/2002 +0000, Ian Horrocks wrote: > [...] > > > > > > About your paper: has there been any official response to the idea of > > using rdfs(fa) to > > > redefine the model for rdf and rdfs? > > > >Not much. There is a proposal to indicate some triples as being > >"non-asserted", which I believe can be seen as a very weak form of > >layered architecture (but when I suggested this to Pat he was rather > >dismissive). > > I'd hate for folks to get the idea that RDFCore are being unresponsive to a > problem. Sorry - didn't mean to imply that. > This is the first I have heard of this proposal to redefine the model for > RDF and RDFS, so its not surprising there has been no 'official response', > at least from RDFCore. Fair enough - it was never really a proposal, just a paper published as SWWS. Ian > > Brian > > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 08:04:32 UTC