- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 07:48:34 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- cc: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Brian McBride wrote: > > Pat, <me-too> <shortVersion>Cool. I like it. Why do we have to do it now? </shortversion> <me-too> <angst> I'm completely torn. We're supposed to be in the end-game now, big changes to our docs at this stage are expensive and risky. But this re-articulation of the RDF Core semantics does to me seem promising as a mechanism for resolving the layering debates that have take up so much time and attention. Promise, however, isn't good enough. I'd like to know how the new work looks from a WebOnt perspective, as well (of course) as hearing the reaction of other WG members. If we are to work on this, I'd like to see a clear demonstration of two things: (i) that the layering of a Web Ontology language over our work becomes easier / possible, and that WebOnt folk acknowledge this (ii) that the creation of subsequent layers of semantic web architecture (eg. rules, query) on top of RDF Core and WebOnt's work also becomes easier (or feasible). I'd like to be convinced that this proposal makes our life easier rather than harder. And that WG members have the energy and enthusiasm and hours in the day to adopt this proposed change. I don't think any of this has been shown yet. Most of all, I want to see more technical comment from WG members. This is an important proposal and an important decision. I hope WG members can find time to take a look at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jun/0040.html http://tap.stanford.edu/SemanticWebSemantics.html http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes/RDF(S)_based_on_Lbase.html ...without slowing down our other work. Which brings us back to the hours-in-the-day and 'why now' problem... </angst>
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2002 07:49:38 UTC