W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: rdf:text review

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:29:41 +0100
Message-Id: <316BBA82-FA66-47E8-8FDE-C19E2EE7DE6B@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
On 28 Apr 2009, at 10:06, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-
>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Axel Polleres
>> Sent: 28 April 2009 09:37
>> To: 'RDF Data Access Working Group'
>> Subject: rdf:text review
>> Dear all,
>> I would like to encourage everybody who has comments on it to read
>> Andy's rdf:text review, such that we can put it forward to OWL+RIF.
>> Unless severe additional new comments or concerns come up, I'd  
>> like to
>> propose to put it forward "as is" as official review of from the  
>> WG to get the process of fixing the concerns going, ideally after
>> today's telecon or at least after the F2F (in case we can't agree
>> quickly today, we should have some discussion about it at the f2f).
> The text sent should have some proposals for changes to the  
> rdf:text (at least in outline) to address the issues raised because  
> some of these issues have been around for sometime now (Dec 2008).
> The current draft reply has not got that far and certainly not to  
> WG consensus.  See my other message for the beginning of this with  
> areas needing text changes.
> It would be good to have your comments on the material so far as  
> you are an editor of rdf:text so, hopefully, we can reduce the  
> number of cycles needed

I've had some conversation with Boris about Andy's comments and he  
was thinking that not much, if any changes were actually needed to  
rif:text. It would be good to get clear on this *before* sending  
comments. Perhaps, Axel, Andy, Boris and I could telcon at some point?

Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2009 09:25:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:54 UTC