Lists Home |
Date Index |
Jonathan Borden scripsit:
> There isn;t much point in discussing either of these topics further, they
> are included in RDF for legacy purposes but left *undefined*. This is a
> polite way of saying that both of the above are *useless* -- you can't even
> argue the topic, because the WD gives no meaning over which to argue -- the
> ultimate in damned by faint praise.
Umm, I think you are severely over-interpreting. It's quite common for
a formal semantics to be incomplete, either because the omitted items
are intractable, or because they're just too annoying to specify.
That doesn't mean they aren't part of the deal.
Business before pleasure, if not too bloomering long before.
--Nicholas van Rijn
John Cowan <email@example.com>