RDF Issue rdfms-logical-terminololgy

• From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
• Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:07:03 +0000
• To: connolly@w3.org
• CC: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
• Message-ID: <3BEFF3A7.8090007@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Dan,
In
   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001JanMar/0077.html
an issue with the RDF specs was raised on your behalf which was recorded in
   https://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-logical-terminololgy
as
   The current RDF terminology is inconsistent with the long established
   terminology used by logicians. For example, what RDF'er's call a 'model'
   is called an 'abstract syntax' by logicians. Logicians use the term
   model but for something quite different.
On 9th November 2001, as recorded in
   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0294.html
the RDFCore WG resolved
   The WG closes rdfms-logical-terminololgy on the grounds that the
   new terminology introduced by the model theory adequately
   addresses this issue.
Please reply to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org indicating whether 
this resolution is acceptable.
Brian McBride
RDFCore co-chair

Received on Monday, 12 November 2001 11:07:23 UTC