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

Re: Draft Partitioning - Summing up

From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:40:15 -0500
Message-Id: <200106211942.f5LJgvQ12510@theinfo.org>
Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
On Thursday, June 21, 2001, at 02:14  PM, Brian McBride wrote:

> There seems to unanimity in the responses for a partition of the
> technical issues into:
>   o an abstract syntax and semantics (previously called core)
>   o schema
>   o vocabularies
>   o RDF/XML syntax

For the record, my proposal did not include a distinction 
between schema and vocabularies. However, I would not be against 
it as long as there is a clear semantic distinction about the 
contents of each.

> I suggest that there is enough agreement around this broad 
> partitioning,
> that with the specific proviso that we remain open minded for 
> the moment
> about where reification, type and class belong, that we can start to
> move forward with each partition in parallel.

I'm not sure what you mean by "moving forward". I'm all happy to 
move forward, and as quickly as possible, but I do not thing it 
is a good idea to begin writing/designing these parts without 
resolving the extremely important issues that will have major 
effects on them. I don't want to get into a situation where 
we've built an abstract syntax with literals and then we decide 
that they're really "data:" URIs.

So let's resolve these issues, please.

[ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2001 15:40:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:49 UTC