W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Jan Wielemaker is o.k. I think

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:35:50 +0000
Message-Id: <F400BBEA-BBD4-473A-8C0E-BBAACC1BB051@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 19 Mar 2009, at 20:55, Michael Schneider wrote:

> Me too.

I agree as well. I think it's good to try to make people happy, but  
that's not the groups job at this point.

> And I think that neither of the two proposed approaches could be  
> seen as a
> serious replacement for OWL/XML.

+1

[snip]
> This doesn't mean that I disregard Jan's basic idea of having one  
> basic
> serialization syntax for RDF, and then extend it for the different  
> SemWeb
> languages. I only believe that it won't help us (or POWDER, or ...)  
> too
> much, in particular not with RDF/XML(-ABBREV) as the base language.

Sandro suggested this as well, and seems to have some ideas in this  
area. I'm pretty skeptical, but I'll be happy to see proposals. But I  
think they'd need a lot of vetting and experience before we could rely  
on them.

It's also contra the current trend. GRDDL, for all its horrific,  
disfiguring, oozy warts, starts from the point of view that XML has  
it's advantages and that it's better *not* to try to displace it, but  
to work with it. That's what I like about it. The warts...not so much :)

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 19 March 2009 21:36:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 March 2009 21:36:27 GMT