- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: 02 Jul 2003 18:18:29 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2003-07-02 at 11:36, Graham Klyne wrote: > I request pfps-22/23 be discussed at the next telecon. Hmm. Peter's comments compares statements from sectin 2.6 and section 4. We could first try: - point out the introduction which states that normative statements are explicitly labelled as such - point out that section 2 is not labelled as normative and section 4 is. - ask him if that clears up the confusion. If it does fine, if it doesn't at least we are down to the wording of section 4. I can take this if you prefer. With regard to his question on Owl, you are under no obligation to review the owl semantics spec. Brian > > See (in particular [2]): > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0003.html > -- my proposal to close pfps-22/23 > > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0006.html > -- response from Peter F. Patel-Schneider > > [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0006.html > -- my message to this list > > [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0007.html > -- Jeremy's response to my message > > I think the first point is discussion should be: do we or do we not > attempt to clarify the text here? Then, if we choose clarification, to > discuss the extent of such. > > #g > > > ------------------- > Graham Klyne > <GK@NineByNine.org> > PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9 A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 13:19:41 UTC