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

Re: Jan Wielemaker is o.k. I think

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:04:45 +0100
Message-ID: <49C35C2D.1070407@w3.org>
To: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
CC: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
I had another round of private mail with Jan yesterday and I think we
are fine as far as the LC is concerned.


Rinke Hoekstra wrote:
> I just walked over to Jan's office to confirm the ACK-OK status of his
> answer, but he wasn't in. In fact, he won't be reachable for the coming
> two months: he will be cycling in Namibia (and South Africa, and perhaps
> Botswana as well).
> ... but I interpret his response as an ACK-OK as well.
> -Rinke
> -----------------------------------------------
> Drs. Rinke Hoekstra
> Email: hoekstra@uva.nl    Skype:  rinkehoekstra
> Phone: +31-20-5253497
> Web:   http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke
> Visit: Kloveniersburgwal 48,       room ET1.09c
> Leibniz Center for Law,          Faculty of Law
> University of Amsterdam,            PO Box 1030
> 1000 BA  Amsterdam,             The Netherlands
> -----------------------------------------------
> On 19 mrt 2009, at 22:35, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>> 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.


Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Friday, 20 March 2009 09:04:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:10 UTC