- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:42:32 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, 'RDF WG' <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 10/10/2013 09:12 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > So should these responses be sent out shortly (i.e., Friday afternoon, > to allow more time for vetoes) or should they wait for chair approval > or even WG approval next week? > It turns out we're chair impaired for a few days. It seems clear to me that this email reflects the WG decisions and is worded in a way that the group is comfortable with, so please go ahead and send it as an official response. -- Sandro > peter > > On 10/10/2013 06:08 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: >> Same here >> >> Ivan >> >> On Oct 10, 2013, at 06:01 , Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: >> >>> This all looks fine to me. >>> >>> Pat >>> >>> On Oct 9, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> >>>> Jeremy send in two messages to -comments on 11 July. The first, >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Jul/0021.html, >>>> >>>> is now ISSUE-142 and is about named graphs and whether there is a >>>> way to get >>>> the name to denote the graph or even just a class rdfs:Graph, and >>>> alludes to >>>> ISSUE-35. The second, >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Jul/0022.html, >>>> >>>> is now ISSUE-151 and is about owl:imports, and alludes to ISSUE-38. >>>> >>>> >>>> Status of ISSUE-142: >>>> >>>> Sandro [was Pat] sent a response for Jeremy's first message, >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Aug/0050.html, >>>> >>>> which Jeremey rejected, in >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Sep/0005.html. >>>> >>>> >>>> On October 2, the working group officially decided to not provide a >>>> semantics for datasets and named graphs >>>> https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-10-02#resolution_2 >>>> This does not mean that there will not be a note on datasets and named >>>> graphs, just that the REC-track documents won't define semantics in >>>> this >>>> area. >>>> >>>> I took an action item to prepare a response to Jeremy (but messed >>>> up and >>>> thought that I was on the hook for Jeremy's other message). >>>> >>>> Here is my proposed second response to Jeremy's first message: >>>> >>>> Dear Jeremy: >>>> >>>> This is a seccond official response to your message about >>>> rdfs:Graph and >>>> RDF datasets, >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Jul/0021.html, >>>> >>>> which is being tracked as ISSUE-142. >>>> >>>> The first official response from the working group was >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Aug/0050.html >>>> >>>> which stated that the working group was unable to agree on any >>>> proposal >>>> for RDF datasets that goes beyond the very minimal proposal in its >>>> current >>>> documents. You responded, in >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Sep/0005.html, >>>> >>>> that you were not satisfied with this situation. >>>> >>>> The working group again discussed RDF datasets and was again unable >>>> to come >>>> up with any viable solution. The only resolution that was >>>> acceptable was a >>>> negative one - that the RDF working group will leave further >>>> semantics of >>>> datasets and named graphs to some future working group. Hopefully >>>> at that >>>> time there will be one or more communities of practice using >>>> aspects of RDF >>>> datasets and named graphs that can be used as the starting point for >>>> portions of a W3C recomomendation. >>>> >>>> The working group realizes that the current situation is not totally >>>> satisfactory to you, but the working group has expended a lot of >>>> effort on >>>> this topic already and has been unsuccessful. There are no forseeable >>>> possibilities of a breakthrough here and thus the working group >>>> will be >>>> concentrating its efforts in other areas so as to finish the work >>>> it needs >>>> to do. >>>> >>>> Please indicate whether you wish to pursue this issue further, or >>>> whether >>>> leaving the situation unchanged in this area is acceptable to you. >>>> Thank >>>> you for your concerns on this topic. >>>> >>>> Yours sincerely, >>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>>> for the RDF Working Group >>>> >>>> >>>> Status of ISSUE-151: >>>> >>>> I believe that Jeremy's second message is all about owl:imports, >>>> and thus >>>> that the RDF working group should not be making any change in >>>> response to >>>> this message. I proposed a response in >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Oct/0097.html >>>> stating this and suggesting to Jeremy that if there is something >>>> else in >>>> this second message that is in the purview of the RDF working group >>>> he is >>>> welcome to raise it. >>>> >>>> >>>> Here is a slightly edited version of my proposed response: >>>> >>>> Hi Jeremy: >>>> >>>> This is an official response to your message about owl:imports and >>>> graph >>>> names and issue 38, >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Jul/0022.html, >>>> >>>> which is being tracked as ISSUE-151. >>>> >>>> The practice that you illustrate concerns the OWL vocabulary for >>>> describing >>>> and combining ontologies. These facilities form a core portion of >>>> the W3C >>>> OWL Web Ontology Language and are thus outside the scope of the RDF >>>> Working >>>> Group. The working group will thus not be addressing this issue. >>>> You may >>>> wish to officially raise this issue against OWL, to be considered >>>> the next >>>> time that OWL is updated. >>>> >>>> If you feel that there is a related issue that within the scope of >>>> the RDF >>>> Working Group, feel free to raise it. >>>> >>>> Yours sincerely, >>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>>> for the W3C RDF Working Group >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> peter >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> IHMC (850)434 8903 home >>> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office >>> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax >>> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile >>> (preferred) >>> phayes@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> > > >
Received on Friday, 11 October 2013 13:42:41 UTC