W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 2003

Re: [closed] re: Pan-01

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 23:52:47 -0500
Message-Id: <p06001a36bb4ba8e10495@[]>
To: "Jeff Z. Pan" <pan@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, Brian_McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

>Dear Pat,
>Thank you for your response.
>>  In response to your comment above,the WG has resolved that to attempt
>>  to define such a proper sub-language is beyond our charter and our
>>  timescale. However, we have resolved
>>  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-layered-subset
>>  that this issue should be classified as postponed, meaning that it
>>  will be on the agenda of any WG which considers RDF in the future.
>>  Please let us know if this adequately responds to your comment, CCing
>>  www-rdf-comments@w3.org.
>As mentioned earlier, I think the point is that the users should
>be informed the existence of the mentioned problems when they
>choose to use the non-layering style of RDFS.

Your most recent emails on this thread did not mention this point; 
you indicated that your intention in making this comment was to 
indicate that there was a need to define a sublanguage of RDF.

That is the suggestion which we have responded to.

I would be grateful, since time is pressing, if you could respond 
directly to the question whether the WG response referred to earlier 
is an adequate one to your previous comment.

>Therefore, I would be happy with your response *only
>if* you could also mention these problems in the semantic document.

Im afraid I am unable to do this as I am not aware of any problems. I 
have previously responded to your claim that there are problems 
arising from the use of a non-layering style; as I indicated then, I 
am not aware of any.  All the issues you mentioned in your original 
comment have been satisfactorily dealt with by other working groups, 
and in any case do not directly impact RDF. As I mention in the 
document (section 1.1) , the non-layered semantics of RDF dos not 
*preclude* the use of a layering discipline.

I respect the fact that you are concerned that there are, or may be, 
problems; but I cannot inform users about them in the document as I 
have no way to know what problems you are referring to; and I cannot 
do so honestly in any case as I do not, myself, believe that there 
are any  problems.  And in any case, even if there were any problems 
of deployment or of consistency with other frameworks, I do not think 
that the semantics document is the appropriate place to discuss them.

IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2003 00:52:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:21 UTC