- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 19:05:25 +0000
- To: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
I'd like to clear the decks as much as possible before the face to face so we can concentrate our time there on problematic issues. So here are a bunch of issue resolution proposals I'd like to bring up at this week's telecon. I could have sent each of these out as a separate mail message, but in the intersts of not generating too much mail traffic, I didn't. If you have issues with any of the proposals, please respond to each proposal in a separate message to keep the discussion clear. rdfms-graph: Formal description of the properties of an RDF graph. Propose the WG resolve that the model theory is a formal description of the properties of an RDF graph and that this issue be closed. rdfms-literals-as-resources: Consider replacing literals with resources whose URI uses the data: URI scheme. Propose the WG resolve that the proposed change would be a major change to the RDF specification and is out of scope for this WG. rdfms-uri-substructure: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification needed (Sergey Melnik) Propose the WG resolves that changing how resources are named on the web is a web architecture issue and beyond the scope of our charter. rdfms-literalsubjects: Should the subjects of RDF statements be allowed to be literals? I suggest that changing the RDF/XML syntax to support this is out of charter. Propose o the WG resolves that the current syntaxes (RDF/XML, n-triples, graph syntax) do not allow literals as subjects. o the WG notes that it is aware of no reason why literals should not be resources and a future WG with a less restrictive charter may extend the syntaxes to allow literals as the subjects of statements. rdf-containers-otherapproaches: The design of the RDF Model collection classes exhibit various awkward features. Might these be augmented with a 'better' design? Propose the WG resolves this issue is out of scope for this WG but places the issue on the list of to be considered by a future WG. rdf-formal-semantics: The RDF Model and Syntax Rec and RDF Schema CR do not provide a formal specification of the semantics of RDF. Propose the WG resolves that the model theory defines formal semantics for RDF and that this issue be closed. rdfms-propElt-id-with-dr : Clarify the interpretation of an ID attribute in the propertyElt production within a Description element with a distributive referrant. Propose the WG resolves that this issue be closed on the grounds that with the removal of rdf:aboutEachPrefix and rdf:aboutEach there are no distributive referrants and the issue is mute.
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2002 14:06:41 UTC