RE: QName URI Scheme Re-Visited, Revised, and Revealing

No offense taken. I know that there are lots of issues that have
to be addressed by the core working group, and many/most of them of
higher priority than those which I have expressed concern over.

I believe that we've covered all of the bases (and possibly gone
round more than once ;-)

The challenge has been that there are several facets to this
issue, which lays at the serialization to graph boundary, and
it is clear from the discussions that some of those facets are 
understood well by the group, but some perhaps not so well, but
at least I think they've all been touched upon sufficiently
for me to leave the issue to the working group.

Some of the frustration that may have (unintentionally) been
reflected in a few of my past postings on this topic was primarily
due to encountering (or at least percieving to encounter) a common
attitude of "it's not a major problem for what I'm working on
so it's not a problem at all" or "the problem doesn't exist in
the conceptual model of RDF so it's not a problem at all". Both
views being difficult to resolve with the presumed intended role
of RDF as the global backbone of the SW and the fact that the
conceptual model is inextricably tied (in real use) to the syntax.

The fact that it took me so many weeks (my first posting on this
topic was in early June) to get past "there's no problem" to at 
least get a "yes, there seems to be a problem in that area" 
on the rdf discussion lists perhaps is food for thought (my
own imperfect communication skills notwithstanding)...

I'll leave it to the core working group now. Please do not hesitate
to ask if any questions about my communication of this issue arise.

Regards,

Patrick

--
Patrick Stickler                      Phone:  +358 3 356 0209
Senior Research Scientist             Mobile: +358 50 483 9453
Software Technology Laboratory        Fax:    +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center                 Video:  +358 3 356 0209 / 4227
Visiokatu 1, 33720 Tampere, Finland   Email:  patrick.stickler@nokia.com
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Aaron Swartz [mailto:aswartz@upclink.com]
> Sent: 27 August, 2001 17:38
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere)
> Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org; sean@mysterylights.com
> Subject: Re: QName URI Scheme Re-Visited, Revised, and Revealing
> 
> 
> On Monday, August 27, 2001, at 09:10  AM, 
> Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> 
> > I'm very happy to leave the issue to the core working group, who
> > are far more knowledgeable and experienced in these matters
> > than I. I apologize if this issue has taken more time from the
> > core working group or the interest group than it is deemed to
> > deserve.
> 
> Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude. I was just curious if there was 
> more to the issue that I wasn't getting, and which you felt RDF 
> Core should fix. Is that all of it then?
> 
> --
>        "Aaron Swartz"      |              The Semantic Web
>   <mailto:me@aaronsw.com>  |  <http://logicerror.com/semanticWeb-long>
> <http://www.aaronsw.com/> |        i'm working to make it happen
>

Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2001 01:54:55 UTC