- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:20:24 -0600
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: 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. They use Ntriples NOTATION to describe RDF graphs. The graph is normative, the Ntriples is not. The documents are quite clear and explicit about this. Other RDF documents use RDF/XML, which is normative and has an exact syntax specification but has the disadvantage, like most XML, of being virtually unreadable. PAt > >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 -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 20:20:28 UTC