W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2003

Re: substantive semantics change?

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:19:51 +0000
Message-ID: <3FB0D3E7.2040008@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> In the absence of arguments that this change is editorial and not substantive, 
> I ask that the chairs reopen the PR decision, in order to consider the 
> resolution of Herman's last call comments which triggered this change.

As I recall, Pat is travelling in the early part of this week.  This 
will hamper clarification of this issue.

The suggestion is that a substantive change, i.e. one visible in a test 
case, has been inadvertently made without consulting the WG.  If true, 
that is unfortunate.

However, I suggest the barrier to reopening the PR decision is quite 
high.  Procedural irregularity is not enough.  Lets address substantive 

- Are you saying that HP cannot live with the current specifications?

> [This is nullified if Pat or others, can make a compelling case that I have 
> misunderstood the situation, and the correct understanding of the two test 
> cases is the same in both LC2 semantics and the current editors draft]

This suggests that HP can live with the current situation.

Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 07:20:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:26 UTC