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

RE: Minutes of 2003-09-12 RDFCore WG telcon

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:41:05 +0200
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Two minor corrections about what I said ...

> 9:  Brian's alternate design writeup: summary of pros/cons
> There was a discussion on this design (now described as "Martin's design")
> and several people saw problems:
>   PatrickS, danbri, GrahamK - backward incompatibility
>   bwm (disagreed with backward incompat.)
>     1) building XML into the core of RDF
>     2) being "two clever by half" - it needed to be explained
> several times.
>   jang - agrees with bwm's points
>   jjc - charmod doesn't say always use XML for markup
(also "two clever by half")
>   patS, gk - XML in the RDF
>   gk - stay with what we have
>   DaveB - breaking data, problems with graph to RDF/XML serialization
> The chair noted that there was no support in the working group for
> spending further time in this design area now.
> ACTION 2003-09-12#3 jjc mention other designs in I18N proposed response
> 10: escaping % in RDF URI refs: can this be wrapped up?
> Jeremy reported there is a need for a change on what is said about
> control characters and maybe on spaces in URIs, or say less.  He
> proposed adding a note about fixing it in an Errata in future. DaveB
> asked that future promises weren't made.
> DanC raised wanting to make a substantive change by changing RDF
> URIrefs to say less (or nothing) by refering entirely to another
> definition.  Jeremy noted we need absolute uris, and thus resolving
> of relative ones such as against xml:base, so the URI RFC alone
> isn't sufficient.
Replace last sentence by:

"Jeremy noted we need absolute uris, and thus a definition of URI

(I like the level of detail in the minutes).

Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2003 11:42:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:25 UTC