Re: WOWG: first language proposal

Jeff Heflin wrote:
>>Finally, an important issue will be finding a way to map your abstract
>>syntax into XML/RDF and still preserve its simplicity. I believe that in
>>order to get a good, intuitive syntax, we'll have to seriously consider
>>dropping the idea of using triples to represent the language, i.e., do
>>not layer on top of RDF Schema (but this is a point I've already raised
>>in another thread).

Jos De_Roo wrote: 
> I haven't seen anything in the past 3 years that would motivate
> such an idea, really,

Can you clarify what you mean by "such an idea"?

Do you not see to the need "to map the abstract syntax into XML/RDF and still 
preserve its simplicity" or to " not layer on top of RDF Schema" ?


Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 01:37:11 UTC