- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:56:44 -0400
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Web Ontology Language ((((OWL)))) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Alan- As I cannot attend this week's meeting (I'm on travel, out of the US and unable to phone in), I'd like to give my opinion re: the question re: Manchester syntax (and other serializations) in the primer . I think we need to be careful on our choice of which syntactic realizations to include. There are at least another 4-5 RDF serializations floating around out there that I know. Some, like N3 and Ntriples, have some W3C legitimacy, some, are used in popular tools (like the SWOOP notation), some are used in some other research papers (I noticed 2-3 in various presentations at ISWC last year). . Manchester has a somehat more mature realization than many of these, but it is still defined in a document with only a draft syntax and no publication status (i.e. copyright etc) [1]. In a previous email thread it was pointed out that some of the OWL tools handle it, but then most also handle N3 (which is more widely used) and SWOOP, for example, has it's own which (and SWOOP is still highly used, despite not being supported at the moment). My proposal would be that we need some specific criteria for what is and is not used in the document. Once we have agreed to principles, we can agree to which serializations to include -- I believe it is important that the document include some discussion of that criterion as well, so that we cannot be accused of arbitrarily choosing without cause. -Jim H. [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ManchesterSyntax On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:16 AM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > > We will discuss steps towards our next working drafts. As we > discussed at the teleconference last week, if you have time, please > read the current documents that we are considering for working > draft, and bring issues to the teleconference. As in the previous > release, we need to know how we will handle disputes - are we > comfortable marking them with editor notes, as previous, or are > there any issues that must be resolved before publishing. > > - http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Primer > - http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Fragments_Proposal > - http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/XML_Serialization > > We would like to have two independent reviewers for each document. > Please consider volunteering to be a reviewer for one or more > document. > > An issue I know to be outstanding re: the Primer is the use of > Manchester syntax. Please give some thought to whether you think > this is a good or bad idea, and why and be prepared to defend your > position. > > Agenda to follow tomorrow. > > -Alan > > "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?." - Albert Einstein Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler Tetherless World Constellation Chair Computer Science Dept Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2008 07:57:00 UTC