(Aside. If I just hit reply to all on these messages, it automatically
includes public-rdf-comme...@w3.org, even though this is not listed as a
recipient. /Aside)
I think I understand what Jeremy is getting at. If I remember correctly, we had
very much this discussion back when we were
On 09/17/2013 02:33 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
(Aside. If I just hit reply to all on these messages, it automatically includes
public-rdf-comme...@w3.org, even though this is not listed as a recipient. /Aside)
(It's not even listed as a CC? That sounds like a serious mail client
bug)
I
Reading the message below, I think the analogies that work for you are not so
good for me.
My analogy was an rdfs:Class as opposed to a mathematical set
Pat's seems to be the ink forming the letter A as opposed to the first letter
of the alphabet
Yours seem to be the hard drive containing a
Some in line responses ...
On Sep 16, 2013, at 6:37 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
[moved to www-archive and cc Pat for now]
So, we could scrub the idea of having a class, and instead define a property.
An alternative proposed modification, which clarifies my desired NO to your
On 09/17/2013 12:35 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
Some in line responses ...
On Sep 16, 2013, at 6:37 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
[moved to www-archive and cc Pat for now]
So, we could scrub the idea of having a class, and instead define a
property.
An
Following that epiphany I had at the end of my last email, here's what
I'd love to see everyone agree on, more or less:
== Named Graphs
An RDF Named Graph is similar to an RDF Graph, but different in one
important way.Because RDF Graphs are defined as being mathematical
sets of RDF
I haven't yet read your epiphany message, so maybe my comments here will
already be out of date …
On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:45 AM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
On 09/17/2013 12:35 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
Oh, okay. So, test case:
:gn1 rdf:namesGraph :g1;
owl:sameAs
