- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 14:12:28 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
timbl-01 is about the first question Tim raised in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0226.html about the use of bagID, we had some discussion of it last week but didn't reach a conclusion or discuss in the last telcon. The first question in the email is: "Is this feature then worth implementing? What does the group think?" We know bagID it isn't used, and probably could be killed if we didn't feel such a change was rather late and/or constrained by charter. If we wanted however that would mean new last call documents for RDF/XML Syntax and Primer - removing things. In this case the answer would be: No and we accept your comment. We will remove bagID from the language and WDs. This substantial change will mean preparing a new set of last call documents. The alternative is to reject this. I don't see the point of postponing this any further, we didn't remove it, wrote test cases for it and people implemented it. So the answer to this question is: Yes and we reject your comment that it is not worth implementing. Several others have implemented it in the RDF/XML->RDF graph mapping from the current round of specifications such as rdflib, Drive, SWI-Prolog, Sesame parser, ARP and raptor. So hopefully, can we pick one of these by the next telcon Friday? Brian: please put this on the agenda. The second part of the above email is about timbl-02 Dave
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2003 08:12:55 UTC