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

Re: collecting objections

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 10:19:44 +0300
To: ext pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BB9DB7C0.17AA%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

On 2003-09-27 04:27, "ext pat hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:

> However, I have to say, looking at the email messages cited,
> particularly from Patrick, it seems that in May, Patrick approved
> strongly of the design where XML literals were syntactically
> distinguished and not considered typed literals; but when I
> re-suggested that we revert to this design in my 'wet fish' message
> after Martin raised this issue - using, I now see, essentially the
> same arguments that Patrick had used (typing and lang tags don't mix:
> XML needs lang tags; ergo, XML literals are not typed) it was Patrick
> who was most vehement in raising objections to it. Funny old world,
> ennit?

I have supported numerous proposals over these many months, some
which I personally supported, and others which I could merely live
with, often motivated by the need to achieve *any* solution
which was minimally workable and sufficiently palatable to
all interested parties.

I've busted my *ass* over the past two years on this, trying
hard to offer ideas and alternatives that meet the needs and
wants of various individuals and groups while still retaining
a generic, scalable, portable, and framework agnostic design.

I refuse to be treated as a scapegoat in this debacle.

Be cautious in what you infer. Be very cautious, Pat.

Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 03:22:28 UTC

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