W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > June 2003

Re: proposed response to Jeff Pan's response of 23 June concerning datatypes

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 23 Jun 2003 13:52:04 -0500
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1056394324.8943.842.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 12:55, Jim Hendler wrote:
> At 12:36 PM -0500 6/23/03, Dan Connolly wrote:
[...]
> >
> >The WG made a relevant decision, no?
> >
> >Yes... on issue 5.8 datatypes, Dec 12
> >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.8-Datatypes
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0205.html
> >
> >So there's a question of whether Jeff Pan's comment constitutes
> >sufficient new information to re-open the decision.
> >
> >I don't feel confident speaking for the chairs on this matter,
> >so I can't authorize you to send this on behalf of the WG,
> >Peter.
> 
> 
> This chair (who is making up the agenda) must admit to a certain
> confusion - what in Peter's response is inconsistent with our
> decision?

Nothing; I didn't mean to say he's not being consistent.
I just mean to say that the WG hasn't delegated this
matter to the editor. Peter essentially read from
the WG record to Jeff in his reply of 16Jun

  Because there is no standard way to go from a URI reference to an
  XML Schema datatype in an XML Schema, there is no standard way to
  use user-defined XML Schema in OWL.
  --
http://www.w3.org/mid/20030616.103019.119356224.pfps@research.bell-labs.com

but that didn't satisfy Jeff:

  I am not sure about this. ...
  --
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Jun/0065.html

But it's not up to Peter to continue the negotiation;
this isn't between the commentor and the editor;
it's between the commentor and the WG.

So the next step is up to the WG, esp. the chairs: does Jeff's
latest message cause us to reconsider our position?


>   That is, I don't see what is inconsistent with our decision to
> accept parts 1,2,  and 5 of [1]
> 
> >
> >Jim/Guus, please consider this; some options I see:
> >
> > --  let us know before sending out this week's agenda that
> >  you don't see sufficient information to open it, or
> >
> > -- re-open the issue and put it on this week's agenda
> >
> > -- put it on this week's agenda to solicit advice about
> >  reopening it, or to discuss the response, or whatever.
> 
> 
> 
> anyway, before I can reconsider the issue, I'm not sure what the
> distinction is (or are you postulating we could adopt Jeff's
> suggestion and use the user-defined type as he proposes, despite
> Peter's response)? 

Yes, the chair could re-open issue 5.6 and the WG could decide to adopt
Jeff's suggestion.


> I'm not trying to be contentious, I'm really just confused
> >
> >
> >oops; did I ever do this?
> >"NEW ACTION Dan - to communicate with XML schema group about URIs for
> >XML datatypes."?
> 
> I believe that was withdrawn at some point (my personal notes say it
> was either going to be a tag or CG issue) - but I don't see that in a
> recorded minutes, so not sure why I came to believe that
> 
> 
>  -JH
> 
> 
> >
> >Hmm...
> >
> >
> >--
> >Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> 
> 
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0265.html
> 
> -- 
> Professor James Hendler                        hendler@cs.umd.edu
> Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies         301-405-2696
> Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.     301-405-6707 (Fax)
> Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742     *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER
> ***
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 23 June 2003 14:51:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT