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

Re: big issue (2001-09-28#13)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 13:26:43 +0100
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDKEDOCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>


I am less than comfortable with the direction of

Graham's
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0002.html

Jan's
http://ioctl.org/rdf/literals

which both seem to make much more of a Literal than M&S.

Our job is constrained by the charter.

I see our job as making the best sense we can out of M&S and schema, and not
reinventing RDF from the ground up.

I include in our job that of finishing various half finished items in M&S
and RDF schema, but not going completely against the spirit of the two
documents.

Given that these documents are problematic "making the best sense we can"
leaves us a lot of room. I also note that data typing, and specifically the
relationship between RDF and XML schema datatypes, probably should be
addressed in part in this round.

I hope we can do that in a way that:
+ is sufficient for what the community needs now,
+ does not break too many older tools that have made a bona fide attempt to
implement M&S and schema
+ leaves the future sufficiently open for an RDF 2 WG.


We do not have a blank piece of paper.

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 08:27:12 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:40:55 EDT