- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:37:58 -0400 (EDT)
- To: heflin@cse.lehigh.edu
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu> Subject: Re: ISSUE 5.6 - daml:imports as magic syntax Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:25:44 -0400 > I feel like we are about to get in a "Yes it is" / "No it isn't" > argument. > Instead of doing that, let me ask some questions to help me understand > your position. What do you mean by a "semantic account of HTTP GET?" > Just some basic properties of the function or a complete definition of > the function? Everything. > If the later, how formal does this definition need to be? As formal as the rest of the model theory. > Why isn't it sufficient that at any given point in time, the GET > function is deterministic and returns a sequence of characters? But then there has to be, in the semantics, an account of how the characters are turned in to a KB. > Do you > think we need to account for the fact that the GET function changes over > time (since web pages change, move, etc.)? I don't. I agree that time-variant behaviour is not necessary. I think it is > sufficient to say that the semantics apply to a particular moment in > time. > > Jeff peter
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2002 16:38:08 UTC