W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > January 2008

Re: RDF (and OWL) datatypes vs XML Schema 1.1 datatypes

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:51:34 +0000
Message-ID: <47823C76.3090508@hpl.hp.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: public-owl-wg@w3.org

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> How do we go about sending an official query on this point?
> 


Peter

I think there are two mechanisms:

informal:

   you send the question you want asked to the schema WG and cc this wg.
It is then a personal question, with the OWL WG as an interested party; 
and you can phrase the question to indicate whether you are happy with 
an informal response (from an editor say), or would like a formal WG 
response.

formal:

   you draft the question, and we vote on it at a WG meeting, and the 
message is sent (as above), signed say
   "Peter F. Patel-Schneider, on behalf of OWL WG"


I think the informal mechanism is more appropriate for this one - but I 
am not on top of XML Schema 1.1 ....

Note: past experience on such communication issues indicates that the 
formal process often degenerates into the informal one, because not 
enough WG participants have read the draft, and feel knowledgeable 
enough to support the sending of the message.

Another variant is to go for the informal process but ask this WG for 
comments on a draft e-mail say 24hrs before sending.

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 14:52:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:29 GMT