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

RE: Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2003-05-11

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 14:45:34 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B01B90DB2@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>


I support expressing this preference to omit the impliable triples.

Patrick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 09 May, 2003 13:52
> To: Jeremy Carroll; w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2003-05-11
> 
> 
> 
> At 12:12 09/05/2003 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >Possible proposal:
> >
> >PROPOSE: that RDF Core asks WebOnt WG to decide this issue.
> >
> >Pat and Dan might be better placed to say than me, but it 
> might be best to
> >delay another week ... :( (I was not at the webont telecon, 
> and there are no
> >minutes or IRC as yet, but got signs of a lack of resolution 
> in the e-mail)
> 
> I've had offlist email from Guus saying that WEBONT was split on the 
> question and would like another week.
> 
> I like your approach and would suggest the following modification.  I 
> believe, that from an RDF point of view RDFCore has a 
> preference - that is 
> to remove the triples - I suggest we say that to WEBONT.
> 
> Therefore, would there be support for:
> 
> PROPOSE:
> 
> Send the following message to WEBONT:
> 
> [[
> RDFCore have received a last call comment [1] requesting that 
> the triples:
> 
>    _:bnode rdf:type rdf:List .
> 
> be removed from the expansion of parseType="Collection" and 
> the grounds 
> that triples are often not required, create an unnecessary 
> implementation 
> overhead and can be easily inserted where required.
> 
> RDFCore are aware that the current OWL specs rely on the 
> presence of these 
> triples, but it has been suggested that this dependence could 
> easily be 
> removed.
> 
> RDFCore would prefer to accept the comment and remove the triples and 
> therefore urge WEBONT remove their dependence on the presence 
> of these triples.
> 
> We would be grateful for a speedy response to this request.
> 
>    [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#timbl-03
> ]]
> 
> If we are not prepared to express such a preference, then the 
> issue is moot 
> and we should not accept the comment.
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> > >
> > > 12: Language tags in typed literals
> >
> >I offer the co-chair  the subagenda just sent out.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 13: Issue xmlsch-01 Typed Literal Structure
> > >
> > > Various proposals to close:
> > >
> > >   
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0247.html
> >  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0252.html
>
>I withdraw my comments 247 in favour of Brian's 252.
>
> > 14: Issue xmlsch-02 Whitespace facets
> >
> > Proposal:
> >    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0224.html
> >
>
>I will try and make a formal proposal now.
>
>Jeremy
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 07:45:40 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:29 EDT