- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:47:37 -0600
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
>"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote: >[...] >> > On syntax I note that Jim suggested actively using N3. If we wish to do >> > this, we may wish to standardize N3 at the same time, since the current >> > specs are rather loose working documents from TBL and DanC. This could be >> > done similarly to how RDF Core have created n-triple. >> >> Frankly N3 scares me. It has this mystique, but there are many differing >> specifications of exactly what it is, and there are no semantics at all for >> some of its constructs. I suggest not touching N3 with an eleven-foot pole. > >N3 scares me too. ;-) > >I sure like it as short-hand; it's really hard to >write XML correctly in email and IRC. > >But Peter's right that there's no real specification of N3 >in traditional logical terms. OK, maybe what we need is N2.5. Think about it. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2001 16:47:41 UTC