- From: Peter F.Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:52:36 -0400
- To: <baojie@gmail.com>
- CC: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
This message appears to be truncated. Did anyone receive a complete copy of it? peter From: Jie Bao <baojie@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Agenda TC 27/05/2009 Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:45:14 -0500 > Unfortunately, I will be able to attend the 1pm telcon for travel reasons. > > I would like to have my proxy votes (as RPI official stance per AC's > instruction) to all the four proposals as given in [1] > > * PROPOSED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral > > +1 > > * PROPOSED: rdf:text: A Datatype for RDF Plain Literals is ready for > publication as a Candidate Recommendation > +1 > > * PROPOSED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and > Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, > RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as > Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the > CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to > rdf:PlainLiteral > > RPI will vote > * +1, if the WG acceptsthe RPI proposal on new CR criteria [2], otherwise > * -1, and we reserve our right to object formally later in the process > if it is not changed - this is not because we oppose the design, but > because we think the current wording is too vague an >
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 17:19:07 UTC