- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 08:55:37 +0200
- To: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On Aug 24, 2012, at 22:00 , Antoine Zimmermann wrote: [snip] > > I'm 100% with Richard on this issue and I propose that we make the following resolution: > 1. if a term is normatively defined by RDF 1.0, we adopt it for RDF 1.1 without any change; > 2. if a term is normatively defined by SPARQL and we want to put the concept in RDF 1.1, we adopt it without any change; > 3. for all terms that do not have a normative definition yet in either RDF or SPARQL, we leave the discussion open to settle on a term. > +1. No, +e^infinity A terminological discussion is like a religious war: it may never end and it hurts everybody. Ivan ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Saturday, 25 August 2012 06:56:01 UTC