Bijan Parsia wrote: >Thus, in the absence of a concrete technical motivation, I think we >should close it. Indeed, absent some evidence of significant WG >support, I think we shouldn't expend more WG resource on it. >Obviously, continued scrutiny is warranted, as always, but I don't >think the current discussion has passed the bar yet. > >I would support putting back object/data punning, for that matter. >The objections there were primarily motivated by syntactic problems >in *one* (important) serialization. That's unfortunate, not happy >making. And Class/Datatype punning? That's disallowed, too, at the moment [1]. Michael [1] <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs#Mapping_from_RDF_Grap hs_to_Functional-Style_Syntax>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:09:10 GMT