Re: What can/should/must we do with rdf:PlainLiteral?

On 20/06/11 15:39, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> On 20 Jun 2011, at 15:20, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>> my main hope is that other documents (i.e. SPARQL) that refer to the term "plain literal" will automagically adopt the new meaning once the new RDF documents are published.
>
> I understand.
>
> Let's pick this discussion up again when the RDF Concepts editors have proposed concrete words.

(team Q, process Q)

Procedurally, does this mean SPARQL is going to have to wait until RDF 
Concepts is formally unchangeable?

Is that the point when the WG agrees no more LCs - or does it have to 
until REC so it can reference RDF Concepts properly? other?

	Andy

>
> Best,
> Richard

Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 20:25:53 UTC