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

Re: Publication of RDFCore working drafts

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 13 Nov 2002 14:10:28 -0600
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1037218228.11400.22175.camel@dirk>

On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 12:56, Brian McBride wrote:
> Well done everyone.
> Since we have so many working drafts, it makes sense to send out just one 
> announcement for them all.  If no one objects, I'll do that tomorrow.

This isn't an objection, but some thinking-out-loud.

Asking everybody to review everything often results
in getting nobody to review anything.

It's clear to me that subscribers to www-rdf-logic
will be interested in the model theory; they're
perhaps more likely to pay attention to
an announcement from PatH (though I hesitate
to impose further on Pat).

The syntax spec and test cases should go to the
developer fora; www-rdf-interest at least, but
probably other places too. I'd expect an
announcement from DaveB to get the most
attention. I'd like to see Mike Dean shop
it around the DAML crowd too.

I'd like to see the "customer groups", i.e. dublin
core, RSS, etc. invited to review the primer.
But I wonder... you can really only expect one
thorough read of a document from any given reviewer.
Do we want to play that card on this draft?
Or do we expect the next one to be substantially
different? EricM, thoughts?

I have similar thoughts/reservations about concepts.

So... hmm... maybe asking everybody to review everything
is right for this round of drafts, supplemented
by a few more targetted invitations here and there.

> Brian
> At 12:06 13/11/2002 -0500, Eric Miller wrote:
> >I'm pleased to announce the publications of the following working
> >drafts:
> >
> >RDF Test Cases
> >W3C Working Draft 29 April 2002
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-testcases-20020429
> >
> >RDF Primer
> >W3C Working Draft 11 November 2002
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-primer-20021111/
> >
> >RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema
> >W3C Working Draft 12 November 2002
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-schema-20021112/
> >
> >RDF Semantics
> >W3C Working Draft 12 November 2002
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-mt-20021112/
> >
> >in addition to the other 2 published yesterday
> >
> >RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)
> >W3C Working Draft 8 November 2002
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20021108
> >
> >Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax
> >W3C Working Draft 08 November 2002
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/
> >
> >this represents a updated collective publication of all of RDFCore
> >deliverables.
> >
> >Congratulations again editors, chairs and working group members for your
> >hard work in making this possible! Woohoo! (or as Frank puts it.. Hot
> >Dang! :)
> >
> >--
> >eric miller                              http://www.w3.org/people/em/
> >semantic web activity lead               http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/
> >w3c world wide web consortium            http://www.w3.org/
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2002 15:11:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:18 UTC