W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2006

RE: A URI for the class of SOAP MEPs

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:41:47 -0800
Message-ID: <E16EB59B8AEDF445B644617E3C1B3C9C6D2886@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>, "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Cc: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "W3C TAG" <www-tag@w3.org>

I don't think that's very fair.  

I think a more accurate analogy is that a working group that is
producing a non-xml format with names is also tasked to map the non-XML
format into XML for some other language AND all the names can be used as
XML tags but the names can't be used as names for the other language,
some members who don't understand the other language don't see the need
for creating another tag just for the other language when there are
already xml tags with names.

Cheers,
Dave



> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of
> Tim Berners-Lee
> On Jan 19, 2006, at 12:39, Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hi Noah, TAG,
> >
> > the suggestion to use a section URI for the concept defined in the
> > section was first (to my knowledge) discussed in WS-Description WG,
> > as those WG members who aren't SemWeb-fluent didn't see the point of
> > inventing new URIs for the purpose of the RDF mapping.
> 
> RDF is made of URIs.
> Making up a URI should not be a big deal.
> Just make an RDF document and stick in what you know about the
> needed things.
> 
> If analogy is needed, by analogy with
> mapping non-XML format into XML,  it as though "some members
> of the group not so familiar with XML didn't see the need to make
> up tags when defining a mapping into XML"
> 
Received on Monday, 23 January 2006 21:42:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:38 GMT