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 11:27:53 +0300
To: ext pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BB9DC7B9.17BA%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>


I apologize if I over-reacted to you're comments. I
doubt you were intending to point any fingers. I guess I
(like most folks) are wary about being singled out in
contentious processes such as this has been.

I guess we're all pretty frazzled over this process, and
none of us are fully satisfied with the end result, even if
most all of us are resigned to live with it, taking it as
the "least unattractive of alternatives".

Please disregard my last post, if you can.


On 2003-09-29 10:19, "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> wrote:

> 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.
> Patrick
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 04:28:58 UTC

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