W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Any use cases for untidy literals except long range datatyping?

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 14:20:57 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020823142004.03c59b80@127.0.0.1>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org 

At 09:00 PM 8/20/02 -0700, pat hayes wrote:
>>Are we closing off any important extensibility paths if we go for tidy 
>>literals?
>
>With regards to this last point, yes. DAML and OIL and probably OWL will 
>need the flexibility of allowing (semantically) untidy literals, and if we 
>forbid them then the DAML spec will need to be rewritten and OWL will 
>probably no longer base itself on RDF (or, an alternative scenario, the 
>Webont WG will split apart into two rival groups which will produce 
>incompatible standards. It is perilously close to this already.)

I didn't realize this.  I think it may be an important datum.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 23 August 2002 09:57:51 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:50:28 EDT