- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 13:50:39 +0100
- To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>
Mr RDF Core WG Chair, a while ago in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0014.html I suggested adding charmod-literals and charmod-uri to the issue list. I am repeating this suggestion, and also wanted to make public your private suggestions that the WG should first make more progress on issues such as datatyping and literals in general before considering the i18n issues in more depth. Hence, I would like us to formally postpone this issues. I think this is made more pertinent in the light of Francois's message concerning charmod-uri which would impact e.g. n-triples. I think I disagree with Francois's message but don't yet want to open up an extended discussion. Francois's message: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0404.html In summary, I believe both issues will have some (limited) impact on syntax, n-triples, and (very limitedly) the model theory; and think we will be able to address them better later rather than now. In particular, I got the impression at the last telecon that a new rev of the test cases working draft was a possibility. I would suggest that this should *not* address i18n as yet. As such, the id-and-about test case http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-difference-between-ID-and- about/test2.rdf should not yet be approved (sorry Aaron). (It conflicts with Francois's proposal concerning uri's). Jeremy
Received on Monday, 22 October 2001 08:50:45 UTC