- From: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 07:55:34 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- CC: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 06/06/2012 02:54, Pat Hayes wrote: >> and doesn't even touch the temporal elements.) > > It allows for that possibility. (There is a temporal example in the document.) The RDF world has to be able to handle both temporal aspects *and* the idea of a permanent record of transient events or temporally sensitive data. > > However, what triggered my comment was the idea of two sources using the same IRI with different intended meanings., which is exactly the situation this 'context' proposal is designed to accommodate. This is a rather different topic from that of handling the temporal details of network protocols. FWIW, I have just suggested that this approach (i.e. Pat's "another spin" proposal) might be useful for handling certain aspects of provenance information, where resources for which provenance is expressed may change over time. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Jun/0125.html #g
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 06:58:36 UTC