W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > October 2001

Re: big issue (2001-09-28#13)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 13:26:43 +0100
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDKEDOCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

I am less than comfortable with the direction of



which both seem to make much more of a Literal than M&S.

Our job is constrained by the charter.

I see our job as making the best sense we can out of M&S and schema, and not
reinventing RDF from the ground up.

I include in our job that of finishing various half finished items in M&S
and RDF schema, but not going completely against the spirit of the two

Given that these documents are problematic "making the best sense we can"
leaves us a lot of room. I also note that data typing, and specifically the
relationship between RDF and XML schema datatypes, probably should be
addressed in part in this round.

I hope we can do that in a way that:
+ is sufficient for what the community needs now,
+ does not break too many older tools that have made a bona fide attempt to
implement M&S and schema
+ leaves the future sufficiently open for an RDF 2 WG.

We do not have a blank piece of paper.

Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 08:27:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:05 UTC