- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:48:48 -0500 (EST)
- To: herman.ter.horst@philips.com
- Cc: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org
How about? I'll change when the RDF/XML Syntax Specification and the RDF Semantics documents change. as they both use N-triples, in preference to the RDF graph and in normative sections. peter From: herman.ter.horst@philips.com Subject: Re: Review comments on OWL Semantics Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:47:28 +0100 > Jeremy Carroll writes: > > > N-triples > > ========= > > I would strongly prefer that the mapping to RDF be expressed as a > mapping > > to the RDF abstract syntax (a graph) not to the non-preferred N-triples > syntax. > > I support this. I made a remark to the same effect in my (partial) review > of > the OWL semantics document at > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0043.html > > > Herman ter Horst
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 08:49:14 UTC