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

RE: RDF datatyping

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:33:47 -0000
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "ext Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "Sergey Melnik" <melnik@db.stanford.edu>, "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CEECKEAMDAJDDEDGJNBEEEAJCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>

Patrick:
> Perhaps some brave soul out there who has the ability would like to take
> a stab at the math for the pairing-based model I am trying very hard to
> express in this troublesome and slippery natural language?

In Pat's offlineness, I fear I am the most qualified.
& Of your supporters I am also the most vocal in this bout!
I am, unfortunately quite busy.

My understanding of what is needed is
 - a shortish document
 - for rdf-interest and the community
 - to present the alternatives
 - in a way that facilitates comparison.

Currently Sergey's doc presents S, and no more work is needed on S to
achieve the above goal.

The PD proposal is being vocally backed by Patrick + Jeremy.

[Is the perl (PL?) proposal still active?]

If Patrick could volunteer to lead a PD write-up (which should IMO be no
more than picking out the best couple of pages of prior e-mail) I am willing
to fill in *necessary* math. For the model theory though, I would be
inclined to duck, pointing to some of Pat's e-mails from November and hoping
that he would be able and willing to fill in the blanks when he's back
online. I would also be happy to act as first (friendly) reviewer prior to a
WG review.

Then we would ideally want an overview doc that put the proposals
side-by-side. Alternatively we could present them to the community just as
two or three separate proposals.


Jeremy
Received on Friday, 11 January 2002 06:34:24 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:43:54 EDT