- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:52:12 -0400
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: pfps@research.bell-labs.com, www-rdf-comments@w3.org, brian_mcbride@hp.com
per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0223.html and the RDFCore WG decision of June 6th[1], this is closed and moved to the RDF Schema editorial todo list. Peter, I'll let you know when the doc is updated to reflect the fix as agreed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003AprJun/0099.html Dan [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0067.html * Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> [2003-03-21 14:24+0000] > Recorded as > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-24 > > Brian > > > At 08:26 21/03/2003 -0500, Dan Brickley wrote: > >Peter, > > > >Thanks for your Last Call review comment on RDF Schema in > >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0149.html > > > >Sorry I'm late with these responses. You ask 'what is RDF schema?' and > >note that the specification appears unclear on this. Rather than treat this > >as an editorial fixup, I think it best that the RDFCore WG treat this > >as formal issue. > >Brian, could you create a LC open issue entry for this? > > > >Aside: > >I think this is related to the 'rename RDF Schema?' issue, > >ie. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#webont-01 > >in that as we've moved towards calling this a 'vocabulary description > >language', rather than 'RDF Schema', there is less tendency towards > >using the noun form, ie. we find ourselves asking what the RDFS/RDFVDL > >language is (answer: a semantic extension of RDF), rather > >than what _an_ RDF Schema is. > > > >Anyway, I agree that we could be clearer on this in the spec. > > > >Thanks for your careful attention, > > > >cheers, > > > >Dan
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 09:52:25 UTC