Re: [ALL] agenda 28 Sep telecon

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 16:16 +0200, William Waites wrote:
> >>>>> "cygri" == Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> writes:
> 
>     cygri> Regrets for today. I'm at a project meeting.
> 
> Likewise for me, unfortunately...
> 
>     cygri> I'd like to see a check for consensus for 2d.
> 
> Personally I still favour 3a then 3b and am not really convinced by the
> "modelling languages is hard" and "using the datatype machinery in anger
> is risky" arguments.

Me, too, but I think we're beyond the strawpoll of personal favorites
and on to the question of whether there is some solution everyone can
tolerate so we can be done with this issue.    The survey results...

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/tagged_literals/results

show only (1) and (2d) as not having a large number of objectors, and
the preference between those two gives us (2d).   So, in the interest of
moving on, I'm now happy to support 2d.

I like the point someone made recently that there is a migration path
from 2d to 3a, and perhaps 3a supporters can explore that for the
future.    But at this point, I'm thinking we have a lot of other work
that's probably more urgent.

  -- Sandro


> Cheers,
> -w
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2011 14:43:19 UTC