W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2002

Re: [xml-dev] RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic

From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:40:02 +0000
Message-ID: <3DDD1A72.2020602@eircom.net>
To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
Cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org

Shelley Powers wrote:
> 
> The working group is delivering more than cleaned up and clarified
> documents -- it's also providing a W3C official stand on how a specification
> will be implemented and used. Any fudging on this will leave us worse off
> than before.

Speaking as an ex-wg member and someone who really really wanted an 
RDF processing model way back when...

The wg is right not to specify a processing model and it's not 
fudging anything. There isn't enough known about how RDF will be 
used in mainstream computing, and more feedback from the trenches is 
needed. Especially so on how to connect an RDF web with the current 
one - there are problems with dereferencing URIs, and XML QNames, 
yes, but no obvious or agreed upon answers. IMHO it's a better idea 
to write down the what of RDF and leave it to others to figure out 
the how. In any case specifying how isn't something that's easily 
policed by a wg and might adversely affect innovation by 
overconstraining what people can and can't do.

But for now, there is enough information in the syntax documents to 
get RDF in and out of computers and in the MT to determine the 
implications of consuming RDF statements.


Bill de hÓra
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 12:44:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT