- From: Mischa Tuffield <mischa.tuffield@garlik.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:04:58 +0100
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <63EA8BC8-7F0B-4601-8DC6-557A575456D0@garlik.com>
Regrets from Steve and myself, we can't make the call today. Mischa On 28 Sep 2011, at 15:42, Sandro Hawke wrote: > On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 16:16 +0200, William Waites wrote: >>>>>>> "cygri" == Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> writes: >> >> cygri> Regrets for today. I'm at a project meeting. >> >> Likewise for me, unfortunately... >> >> cygri> I'd like to see a check for consensus for 2d. >> >> Personally I still favour 3a then 3b and am not really convinced by the >> "modelling languages is hard" and "using the datatype machinery in anger >> is risky" arguments. > > Me, too, but I think we're beyond the strawpoll of personal favorites > and on to the question of whether there is some solution everyone can > tolerate so we can be done with this issue. The survey results... > > http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/tagged_literals/results > > show only (1) and (2d) as not having a large number of objectors, and > the preference between those two gives us (2d). So, in the interest of > moving on, I'm now happy to support 2d. > > I like the point someone made recently that there is a migration path > from 2d to 3a, and perhaps 3a supporters can explore that for the > future. But at this point, I'm thinking we have a lot of other work > that's probably more urgent. > > -- Sandro > > >> Cheers, >> -w >> >> > > > ___________________________________ Mischa Tuffield PhD Email: mischa.tuffield@garlik.com Homepage - http://mmt.me.uk/ +44(0)208 439 8200 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2011 15:05:31 UTC