W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > October 2010

Re: RDFa API comments from TimBL

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 17:33:04 +0200
Cc: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, nathan@webr3.org, RDFA Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <EDCD5EB9-17A5-480A-8AE7-40E22B10E5F9@w3.org>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Actually, I think we are on a good track with all that, although Nathan is the one who can really tell us. Looking at


and Nathan's reply


seems to say that it is possible to

1. have a core RDF API which, with minor tweaks, is almost the same as what we have now in the document, but is also compatible with the Tabulator API (though it constitutes only a subset of the Tabulator API)
2. have the RDFa API built on top of this core, which is essentially what we have already
3. have some additional features that are part of an RDF Core API and the Tabulator API, but is not needed by RDFa (though is useful/necessary for a general RDF API; the typical example is the removal of triples from the store).

This WG is chartered to do #2 which requires #1, and that can be done (again, per Nathan, who knows both). This group is not chartered to do #3; it may choose to write it down in a note (if it has the time an energy), on a wiki, or whatever, and some other group will have to pick that up in future. 

The important point is, for this discussion, #1, at least in my view. Ie, if a future group does #1 and #2, it should not be forced to do something incompatible with the RDFa API. 


On Oct 7, 2010, at 17:17 , Manu Sporny wrote:

> On 10/07/10 09:55, Shane McCarron wrote:
>> Sure, but you didn't answer the key question here, Tim.  WHERE should
>> that RDF API work happen?  We think it should happen in the RDFa Working
>> Group because 1) there is one, and 2) we have already done lots of the
>> work.  What do you think?
> Not to mention that stopping/moving the RDF API part of the RDFa API
> work from this group is going to be incredibly disruptive to our charter
> and timeline. We are chartered to produce an RDFa API.
> We need a solid RDF API if we are going to have a solid RDFa API - one
> of the reasons that we asked Nathan to join the RDFa WG was to ensure
> that the RDFa API work took the Tabulator work, and thus, the RDF API
> work, into account.
> We have a good head of steam behind us, I'm wary of disrupting that as
> we're closing in on something that is getting positive feedback from the
> community.
> -- manu
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Making Payments Frictionless, Saving Journalism
> http://digitalbazaar.com/2010/09/12/payswarm-api/

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 15:33:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:21 UTC