- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 14:45:34 +0300
- To: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
I support expressing this preference to omit the impliable triples. Patrick > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com] > Sent: 09 May, 2003 13:52 > To: Jeremy Carroll; w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2003-05-11 > > > > At 12:12 09/05/2003 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > [...] > > >Possible proposal: > > > >PROPOSE: that RDF Core asks WebOnt WG to decide this issue. > > > >Pat and Dan might be better placed to say than me, but it > might be best to > >delay another week ... :( (I was not at the webont telecon, > and there are no > >minutes or IRC as yet, but got signs of a lack of resolution > in the e-mail) > > I've had offlist email from Guus saying that WEBONT was split on the > question and would like another week. > > I like your approach and would suggest the following modification. I > believe, that from an RDF point of view RDFCore has a > preference - that is > to remove the triples - I suggest we say that to WEBONT. > > Therefore, would there be support for: > > PROPOSE: > > Send the following message to WEBONT: > > [[ > RDFCore have received a last call comment [1] requesting that > the triples: > > _:bnode rdf:type rdf:List . > > be removed from the expansion of parseType="Collection" and > the grounds > that triples are often not required, create an unnecessary > implementation > overhead and can be easily inserted where required. > > RDFCore are aware that the current OWL specs rely on the > presence of these > triples, but it has been suggested that this dependence could > easily be > removed. > > RDFCore would prefer to accept the comment and remove the triples and > therefore urge WEBONT remove their dependence on the presence > of these triples. > > We would be grateful for a speedy response to this request. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#timbl-03 > ]] > > If we are not prepared to express such a preference, then the > issue is moot > and we should not accept the comment. > > Brian > > > > > > > > 12: Language tags in typed literals > > > >I offer the co-chair the subagenda just sent out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 13: Issue xmlsch-01 Typed Literal Structure > > > > > > Various proposals to close: > > > > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0247.html > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0252.html > >I withdraw my comments 247 in favour of Brian's 252. > > > 14: Issue xmlsch-02 Whitespace facets > > > > Proposal: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0224.html > > > >I will try and make a formal proposal now. > >Jeremy
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 07:45:40 UTC