- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 20:10:32 -0400
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>>X-Authentication-Warning: tux.w3.org: danbri set sender to >>danbri@w3.org using -f >>Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 07:04:48 -0400 >>From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org> >>To: hendler@cs.umd.edu >>Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org >>Subject: [webont-01] rdfcore issue 'rename schema' >>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-14.1 required=5.0 >> tests=BAYES_00,USER_AGENT_MUTT,X_AUTH_WARNING >> autolearn=ham version=2.53 >>X-Spam-Level: >>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) >> >>Jim, >> >>Thanks for your comments in >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0335.html >>on RDFCore's RDFS document. This message is a response to one issue >>you raised there on behalf of WebOnt, namely the request that we change >>the name to omit the word 'schema'. >> >>After some discussion, both email, telecon and face to face amongst those >>of us who were at WWWW2003, the working group decided on June 6th[1] not to >>accept this change. The cost of purging the phrase 'rdf schema' from use >>in our specs, in other W3C specifications, and from wider use is high. The >>working group did give serious consideration to making this change, >>but could not justify the cost given the stage we are at the development >>and deployment of this technology. As a result, we continue to >>use 'rdf schema' as the name for RDF Core's vocabulary description language. >> >>Please reply to this message as to whether this response is >>satisfactory, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org. Again, thank you for your >>comments. >> >>Dan >> on behalf of the Web Ontology Working Group I accept this response as satisfactory - there has been no opposition to it from the WG following its posting. -JH p.s. To avoid cross-posting, a copy of this note will also go to the Web Ont WG list.
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 20:10:37 UTC