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

Re: defusing objections [was Re: NotAccepted's against semantics]

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:43:45 -0400
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20030925174345.GB15536@w3.org>

* Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org> [2003-09-25 13:42-0400]
> 
> * Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> [2003-09-25 18:16+0100]
> > 
> > Two of Peter's objections concern the translation to LBase.  I'm 
> > wondering whether we might defuse these objections by replacing the 
> > LBase appendix with a suitably worded informative reference to the LBase 
> > note, e.g.
> > 
> > [[
> > An alternative formulation of the semantics of RDF(S) in the form of 
> > axioms for the langauge LBase can be found in the LBase specification 
> > [ref to lbase note].
> > ]]
> 
> I support this. While I'm an LBase fan, I could live with such a 
> repartitioning in the interests of finishing our work.

To be clearer: I hereby propose that we amend Semantics as outlined 
above.

Dan

> 
> Dan
> 
> > 
> > Brian
> > 
> > Brian McBride wrote:
> > >
> > >Peter has clarified [1] the status of some of the comments he has made 
> > >on the LC semantics document:
> > >
> > >pfps-02 - translation to lbase - pfps notes the ball is in our court.
> > >
> > >pfps-03 - translation to lbase - pfps just doesn't see the need for 
> > >lbase in the document
> > >
> > >pfps-04 - rdf closure rules - pfps wants a stronger notion of 
> > >completeness of the closure rules
> > >
> > >pfps-05 - rdfs closure rules - again pfps wants a stronger notion of 
> > >completeness of the the closure rules
> > >
> > >pfps-06 - xml literals and LV - it is possible the latest docs fix this 
> > >and we have not pointed this out to pfps.
> > >
> > >Brian
> > >
> > >[1] 
> > >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0354.html
Received on Thursday, 25 September 2003 13:43:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 25 September 2003 13:43:48 EDT