Re: A basis for convergence and closure?

At 16:30 06/02/2002 -0800, Sergey Melnik wrote:
>Pat Hayes wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >It seems that, from all the past couple of weeks discussions,
> > >there are the following characteristics on folks wish lists
> > >(this is a partial recap of some of the desiderada):
> > >
> > >1. A working MT (duh ;-)
> > >2. Tidy literals
> > >3. A global/implicit idiom
> > >4. A local/explicit idiom
> > >5. Same vocabulary valid for both local and global idioms
> > >6. Free combination of local and global idioms without conversion
> > >7. The ability to conduct queries by value
> > >8. The ability to conduct queries by literal
> > >9. Datatype URIs denote the entire datatype, as defined by
> > >    the datatype "owner", not only one of its components
>
>Pat, I think your summary is sharp enough so that I would suggest to use
>it as a starting point for a convergence write-up. We could produce it
>in a quick and streamlined fashion by simply referring to the relevant
>sections of the TDL, S, and  Pat's documents where appropriate, without
>replicating existing content. I think the main focus should be on
>capturing two things: a list of items we managed to agree on, and a list
>of options where we still have to make a final choice. What do you think
>guys?

Yummy. Yes please.

Brian