RE: Chairs' decisions about reopening some issues

> 1 - RDF Compatibility -- Jeremy Carroll, in [1] has proposed
> reopening the issue as to what is and is not in OWL Lite -- in
> particular with respect to some RDF constructs that were not
> included.  The decision as to what is in Lite was arrived at over
> time and with great effort to reach consensus, and we do not wish to
> reopen this issue at this time.  (Discussed under issue 5.2,
> resolutions at Bristol f2f [2])
>

Please clarify how this relates to rdf:XMLLiteral,
and please also clarify how any decision that we may still consider whether
or not rdf:XMLLiteral is in OWL Lite differs from any decisions whether we
may consider whether or not rdfs:isDefinedBy is in OWL Lite, or whether or
not the triple

rdfs:Bag rdf:type owl:Class .

may or may not be in an OWL Lite ontology.


Jeremy