W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > November 2001

RE: RDF and datatypes

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 07:06:21 -0500
To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20011120070621Q.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
If you are interested in a group that might be able to produce a consensus
opinion, then the joint committee probably is a better bet, at least just
now.  (I see that Mike Dean has been charged with doing exactly this.)

I think that it would be useful to solicit the view of non-joint committee
people on WOW-G, particularly those who care about XML.  To get reasoned
opinions from that group, however, it would be better to have more
information on S, particularly on what the RDF/XML encoding of S would look
like, and what XML constructs S is and is not compatible with.  I think
that this would be a good idea in any case, and a good idea for all of the
contending proposals.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research


From: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: RE: RDF and datatypes
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:40:16 -0000

> > > Summary: can WOW give feedback on the 'S' datatyping proposal
> > being made in
> > > RDF Core WG?
> >
> >  [...]
> >
> > Hmm.  Interesting question.  As the WOW-G has only had one
> > telecon, I don't
> > know how soon the group could get together a consensus opinion
> 
> 
> Yes - this is a good point, but  I guess individual opinions by e-mail may
> form together to help arrive at a consensus.
> 
> Maybe we should discuss how to progress this at the next telecon. One
> possible response to RDF Core is simply, "sorry, we are not yet at the point
> where we have opinions - come back in a couple of months".
> 
> Personally I would hope we can do better than that.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 07:07:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:46 GMT