W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2003

Re: RDFCore 2nd last call

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 11:38:18 +0100
Message-ID: <3F4B389A.5090702@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, i18n <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Hi Martin,

Martin Duerst wrote:
[...]

> 
> 
> Do you have any idea of what the RDF Core WG might be going to do with it?

There are currently no plans to change this.

> 
> Btw, a page with the documentation of our formal objection is taking shape
> at http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2003/rdf.html. [This is currently
> member-only.]

That is helpful.  Thank you for the link.

[...]

> 
> - There is the issue of equivalence between plain literals and XML
>   Literals. On this issue, we have discovered that this equivalence
>   doesn't hold rather late in the process, and have therefore not
>   insisted on it (apart from the confusing equivalence with octets
>   that turned up at some point). I think that a lot of progress has
>   been made on this issue, so it could be left as is, but with a new
>   last call, we may want to consider whether we should bring it up
>   and ask for full resolution.

This is the one that I particularly had in mind when I asked the 
question.  Addressing it would require some change to the current design.

> 
> - We may have to think about whether we should register an issue
>   with regards to the treatment of XML Literals as types. When
>   I read some of the last call documents, I found this treatment
>   odd, but thought that it may be okay as a technical device as
>   long as it didn't have any undesirable side-effects.

Ok.  That's a new one on my mental list.

> 
> 
> I hope that this is the kind of information you were looking for.
> If not, please feel free to tell me.

Very much so.  My concern is to determine whether RDFCore can move to a 
second last call immediately.  It doesn't seem like a good idea to do a 
second last call with the current ed's drafts then make substantive 
changes as the result of last call comments on that and then have to do 
a third last call.  Before doing a second last call we should ensure 
that RDFCore have considered all the comments I18N would like to make.

Brian
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2003 06:39:53 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:59:41 EDT