- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:37:01 -0400
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5076D98D.2020003@openlinksw.com>
On 10/11/12 9:59 AM, Henry Story wrote: > On 11 Oct 2012, at 15:56, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote: > >> >> On 11/10/12 13:46, Alexandre Bertails wrote: >>> But imposing >>> absolute URIs to define RDF graph is plain wrong, and highly >>> impractical. >> Do you agree the RDF specs do require absolute URIs as those specs are currently written (or drafted in RDF 1.1)? > Andy how can the abstract syntax be correct, if RDF/XML has had relative URIs since the beginning, and Turtle also? There is clearly a bug in the abstract syntax. > >> Andy > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > +1 I don't understand why the gut reaction is to refer to broken specs. These broken specs are the source of so many problems. I don't recall any mandate that renders them untouchable etc.. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 14:37:32 UTC