Re: vCard confusion and RDF insufficiency

Garret Wilson wrote:
> Ivan,
> Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Garret Wilson wrote:
>>   [snip]
>>> Let me stress that I would like the RDF 2.0 effort and the RDF vCard
>>> effort to advance in parallel, so that RDF 2.0 in no way holds up RDF
>>> vCard. I've already provided Harry with a new RDF vCard update, which I
>>> hope to see publicly soon.
>> Do you refer to RDF 2.0 as a new version of the RDF model, or do you
>> refer to a new version of RDF/XML?
> When I say "RDF 2.0", I refer to and only to a new version of the RDF
> model. When I wrote the above paragraph, I had not yet advanced any
> proposal for a new serialization of RDF.

O.k. thanks, I understand. And with that made clear I respectfully
disagree:-) Any work on RDF 2.0, as you call it, is bound to be
non-that-easy and, consequently, longer. I would _not_ want to see the
RDF vCard effort to advance in parallel with a new version of RDF. I am
not saying such an RDF 2.0 work might not come at some point in the
future, but I would definitely prefer to decouple vCard from it...

B.t.w., I did not see anything in the discussions on vCard until now
that would warrant any change on the RDF model...



Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
PGP Key:

Received on Friday, 27 July 2007 15:06:12 UTC