W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > February 2011

Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 23 Feb 11am EST

From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:59:39 -0500
Message-ID: <20110223.085939.234698890048640683.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
CC: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
Subject: [ALL} Agenda telecon 23 Feb 11am EST
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:36:25 -0600

[...]

> 2. Task forces
> 
> Today mainly review of inputs
> 
> 2.1 Turtle
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Turtle
> 
> 2.2 JSON
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON
> 
> 2.3 Graphs
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs
> 
> 2.4 Other

[...]

I can make fairly good guesses on how the Turtle and JSON TFs should
proceed.  However, I don't have any idea on how the Graph TF is going to
proceed.  Is there any neutral document that at least lays out the major
possible ways to go?   I also have some fears here, namely that we will
end up with something similar to RDF reification.


peter

PS: Of course, given my past criticism of Turtle documents, I have some
ideas of what I think needs to be done in the Turtle TF, which may not
completely fit the WG consensus.
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2011 14:00:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:38 GMT