W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2002

FW:

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 12:54:57 +0200
To: <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B89012A1.E30A%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com


------ Forwarded Message
From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 19:35:21 +0200
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>,
ext Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>, Jeremy Carroll
<jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, ext Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>, ext
Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: FW: 


--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com


------ Forwarded Message
From: "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:05:58 +0000
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: 

Patrick,

I screwed up - meant to send my message to rest of the folks not just you.
Would you mind sharing this with Pat, Sergey et al

Brian


At 16:14 12/02/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>On 2002-02-12 13:25, "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Are you prepared to recommend the technical approach to datatyping,
> > described in Pat's document, to the WG?
> >
> > I think I have heard yes, from PatH, PatS and Sergey.  Is that correct?
>
>So long as it is clear that there are points still
>under debate, and that it is not (unfortunately) the
>unreserved recommendation of our converged views, yes.
>
>I feel it is important that certain key points be
>identified (even as footnotes) so that the WG is
>made aware of them -- particularly the fact that
>the datatype triple idiom is not a fully local idiom
>and that its actual utility in real-world applications
>is disputed.
>
>Pat's verbage does not bear that out.
>
>I'm really, really trying hard to bend on this one,
>and have been spending most of today just trying to
>think of arguments in favor of all three idioms.
>
>Sorry if I seem to always be the odd man out. It's
>not intentional.
>
> > Turning then to the questions of emphasis and usage,  assuming the WG
> > accepts the proposal as is, would it be acceptable to present it to the
> > community, largely as is, specifically to PRISM, CC/PP, DC, DAML+OIL, OWL
> > and any others we can think of, seeking their feedback.  We could then base
> > the finer points of presentation and emphasis on that feedback.  If they
> > all come back and say we are going to use the doublet approach, that might
> > influence or presentation.  If some come back and say they want to use
> > doublet's and other's want to use datatype triples, then we might present
> > things somewhat differently.
>
>I agree that feedback from the community will be invaluable,
>as it has been thus far -- but again, it is important that it
>contain "all the facts".
>
>I won't support a proposal going out to the community that doesn't
>reflect at least the non-local nature of the datatype triple
>idiom and that the doublet idiom is the only fully local idiom.
>I think otherwise there will be alot of folks who miss that fine
>point and if the doublet idiom is dropped will not be pleased with
>the results.
>
>Ideally, we would provide commentary as per the TDL and S proposals
>as to how it meets the agreed desiderada. That should satisfy the
>above concerns.
>
>
> > I was saying on Friday that the original plan had been to write up
> > datatypes as a note.  However, given that we had established support from
> > the community, then it may be possible to include it in the schema rec,
> > which would save another WG having to go over all this ground again.
>
>I think having it in the schema rec also will put more weight
>behind it and encourage broader adoption/conformance.
>
>Patrick
>
>--
>
>Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
>Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
>Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com



------ End of Forwarded Message

------ End of Forwarded Message
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 05:53:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:16 GMT