ISSUE-46: Revisit "Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two uri's to be equivalent?"

revisit-rdf-equivalent-uri's

Revisit "Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two uri's to be equivalent?"

State:

CLOSED

Product:

Cleanup tasks

Raised by:

David Wood

Opened on:

2011-05-03

Description:

See http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-equivalent-uris
rdf-equivalent-uri's: Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two
uri's to be equivalent?

RESOLVE: Closed, owl provides owl:sameAs already.

Pierre-Antoine wishes to continue discussion:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0339.html

NB: The Charter allows us to "Update and extend the RDF Primer. New features may include multi-syntax examples, more up-to-date in terms of the vocabularies used, may deal with issues around Linked Data like the use of “owl:sameAs”, the “follow-your-nose” algorithm, etc."

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: Reviewing open DCAT actions; action required from Bernadette, Phil, John, Sandro (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2013-01-31)
2. Reviewing open DCAT actions; action required from Bernadette, Phil, John, Sandro (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2013-01-31)
3. Re: RDF-ISSUE-46 (revisit-rdfms-quoting): Revisit 'Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two uri's to be equivalent?' [Cleanup tasks] (from pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr on 2011-05-03)
4. RDF-ISSUE-46 (revisit-rdfms-quoting): Revisit 'Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two uri's to be equivalent?' [Cleanup tasks] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2011-05-03)

Related notes:

Display change log