- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 13 Feb 2002 14:28:26 -0600
- To: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
On Tue, 2002-02-12 at 17:54, Frank van Harmelen wrote: [...] > 3. I think it's a shortcoming of this (otherwise excellent) document that it seems to suggest that the same-syntax/extended-semantics is not obtainable. It >*is*< obtainable with any of the above fixes to RDF(S), and I would strongly suggest that the document discusses them (after all, its purpose is to lay out the map of all options). yes, please. I asked for this in my message of 08 Feb 2002 16:24:08 -0600; I haven't seen a response. > Frank. > ---- > > As a PS: I'm very happy that with the highly readable requirements doc by Jeff et al. and the layering options doc by Peter and Dieter this WG is well on its way to produce much more readable documents than any of the other W3C groups I know of. > > [1] http://sesame.aidministrator.nl/doc/rdf-interpretation.html#N1c1e48d > [2] http://www.semanticweb.org/SWWS/program/full/paper11.pdf > [3] http://www.kbs.uni-hannover.de/Arbeiten/Publikationen/2000/modeling2000/wolpers.pdf Yup. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 15:28:04 UTC