W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Agenda requests: Issues we can decide?

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:55:48 +0000
Message-Id: <0EB5D9D1-2FC6-4680-96BB-CFADB9B1C407@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: "Web Ontology Language (OWL) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

I would like datatypes and data predicates to go on the agenda,  
though I don't think we can settle all the issues this week by any  
means (perhaps any?). What would interest me is

	*if people felt that the inline system *should* be switched to XML  
Schema syntax in the RDF mapping or strongly *should not* (I've heard  
some implementors say, Not) and
	* how to deal with external user defined datatypes. We then need to  
send whatever solution to these two things we come up with to the XML  
Schema WG for review.

I don't see that we can usefully start defining built-in n-ary  
datatype predicates until it's decided that we'll have them, so if  
Jeremy could get some cycles to consider my recapitulation of his  
(and David Turner's) objections, that would be helpful. We could  
spend a *little* telecon time building momentum for discussion for  
the following week.

I would also like some telecon time to talk about rich annotations.  
Again, I doubt we could *settle* anything, but I'd like to get a  
sense of whether I should pursue my current sketchy proposal.

I think it would be good practice and morale boosting to decide some  
issues. Surely there must be *some* uncontentious ones ;) I suggest  
the following (with my belief on how they should go):

	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/2 (easy yes)
	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/8 (easy no)
	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/15 (easy yes)

I suppose the chairs could just not open 8, but I think opening and  
closing could be fun!

Received on Monday, 5 November 2007 21:54:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:00 UTC