- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 17:32:01 +0100
- To: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
At 16:51 08/05/2003 +0100, Ian Horrocks wrote: >The decision is acceptable, even if not (in my opinion) optimal. > >I would like to be considered a co-submitter of comment #danc-04 and >informed about its resolution. Thanks for the response Ian, done. The formal notification has not yet come out, but for your information, the RDFCore decided last week to postpone danc-04 and add it to our postponed issues list. http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-fyi Brian >Regards, > >Ian Horrocks > >On April 29, pat hayes writes: > > Ian, > > > > In > > > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0338.html > > > > you made a last call comment on the RDFCore last call WD's, recorded as > > > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#horrocks-01 > > > > The RDFCore WG has considered your comment and resolved not to accept it: > > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0207.html > > > > This comment gave rise to considerable discussion. While the WG is > > sympathetic to the need for semantically empty comments, to add a > > special syntax for them was considered too much of a change to RDF at > > this stage and possibly outside the WG charter. Also, the WG noted > > that applications can store such comments in an external RDF surface > > syntax (eg in XML). Concerning the proposal to render rdf:comment > > entailments inoperative (vacuously true) by semantic fiat, the WG > > notes that other users desire rdf:comment entailments to hold, so > > modifying the semantics to make all such entailments trivial would be > > controversial. Moreover, we note that OWL can impose such a condition > > within OWL-RDF as part of a semantic extension. > > > > Please respond to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org > > indicating whether this decision is acceptable. > > > > Please note also, that there is another, related and as yet > > unresolved comment: > > > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#danc-04 > > > > which requests adding a trivially true predicate. Would you like to be > > considered a co-submitter of this comment and informed about its > resolution? > > > > Pat Hayes > > > > -- > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home > > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > > FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell > > phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes > > s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 12:32:39 UTC