W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > December 2002

Re: RDF schemas/analysis of XML Schema datatype relations (Re: Minutes RDF Core WG Telcon 2002-12-06)

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:56:29 +0200
Message-ID: <006001c2a032$69456640$7480720a@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "ext pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ext pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>; <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 09 December, 2002 19:11
Subject: Re: RDF schemas/analysis of XML Schema datatype relations (Re: Minutes RDF Core WG Telcon 2002-12-06)

> >[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, 
> >patrick.stickler@nokia.com]
> >
> >
> >>  ...Discussion of datatypes schema, where to put it.
> >>  >Suggestion that the schema be moved to a separate document and worked
> >>  >at a different rate outside this WD.
> >>  >
> >>  >[scribe note: I think above might be an action to PatH or an
> >>  >editorial change].
> >>
> >>  I think that if it is an action item then it should be on some subset
> >>  of Patrick, Jeremy and me. A new document presumably needs an editor,
> >>  right? I could carry this if it is seen as a chore, but since the
> >>  material is largely Jeremy/Patrick's, it would be more appropriate if
> >>  it had their names on it.
> >
> >I think that Jeremy should get primary credit based on his material in
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0588.html
> >would serve as an excellent foundation for such a document, adding
> >in the RDF Schemas (reflecting different levels of contention/ambiguity)
> >as appendices to that work, or referenced from that.
> >
> >And that would serve as good input to the XML Schema WG, perhaps with
> >the goal of evolving it into a joint Note with a single RDF schema
> >reflecting the concensus of the two WGs.
> >
> >Eh?
> Agreed. Now, who is going to actually write up this thing? Who's the editor??
> I ask because we are now in the same kind of position with regard to 
> this that we were with Lbase: we need to be able to refer to it, but 
> in order to do that it has to exist.
> Maybe Brian should intervene and order one of us to do it.
> Pat

I nominate Jeremy to be primary editor, since he's already written 
such an excellent analysis. We can then support him as much as possible 
in the process of getting it to a point ready for submission to the
XML Schema WG.

OK Jeremy? Brian?

Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 05:02:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:19 UTC