A collection of issue resolutions

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