W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

#rdfms-literals-as-resources in scope?

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 08:48:42 +0100
Message-ID: <3B4178DA.A1B48D30@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
We need to resolve the question of whether this issue is in scope or not.

Lets review the criteria for what is in and out of scope for the WG.

The charter says:
  
  Implementor feedback concerning the RDF Model and Syntax Recommendation 
  points to the need for a number of fixes, clarifications and improvements 
  to the specification of RDF's abstract model and XML syntax.

  ...

  The role of the RDF Core WG is to prepare the way for such work by 
  stabilizing the core RDF specifications. The RDF Core WG is neither 
  chartered to develop a new RDF syntax, nor to reformulate the RDF model.

I presume that we are all still comfortable to be bound by the charter.
Broadly, the charter says we are to fix, clarify and improve the
SPECIFICATION of RDF's abstract model and XML syntax.  We are
specifically forbidden from reformulating the RDF model.

What does m&s say about the relationship between resources and literals.
The problem we have is that m&s is not as clear on some things as it
could be - that's why the WG exists after all.  Whilst its possible to
come up with creative interpretations of the document, we should
in principal not indulge ourselves like that.  Where multiple
interpretations are possible, the simplest and most obvious is to
be preferred.  

I suggest that the issue in question here is whether the abstract model
described in m&s has a distinguished representation for Literals.

I have phrased this question carefully.  The question is not whether a 
literal is a resource, for to answer that we need to resolve a bunch
of difficult issues around what resources are.  The question is
whether the abstract model described in m&s treats literals specially.
If it does, then so must we if we are to avoid 'reformulating' the model.

Brian
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2001 03:50:59 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:06 EDT