[closed] pfps-14 "Social Meaning and RDF"

Thank you.

(This message to complete the administrative process to close issue pfps-14.)

#g
--

At 09:48 05/08/03 -0400, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>It appears to me that social meaning is no longer an issue in RDF
>Concepts.
>
>As far as I can tell, the only remnants of the social meaning issues that
>remain in the RDF documents are in RDF Schema, and that is the subject of
>another comment.
>
>Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>Bell Labs Research
>Lucent Technologies
>
>
>From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
>Subject: [closing?] pfps-14 "Social Meaning and RDF"
>Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:21:04 +0100
>
> > Peter,
> >
> > Further to your comment, recorded against the RDF Concepts document:
> >    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-14
> > and your earlier response (below):
> >
> > The RDF Concepts editors' draft [1] is now in what we believe to be a
> > near-final form.    The full list of changes to RDF Concepts in 
> response to
> > this comment is listed in appendix A.1:
> > [[
> > Deleted section 4 about social meaning. cf msg from meeting at tech
> > plenary. Also removed previous section 2.2.8 ("A Basis for Binding
> > Agreements") as this also related to social meaning. Also: removed mention
> > in section 3.3. Datatypes about the defining authority of a datatype URI.
> > Small consequential changes in abstract and introduction and bulleted list
> > at start of section 2.2. Consequential deletion of [HTTP] and [URI-REG]
> > references.
> > ]]
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/
> >
> > Can you please indicate, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org, whether or not
> > the noted changes in this document have addressed the issue to your
> > satisfaction.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > #g
> > --
> >
> > At 07:37 14/03/03 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> >
> > >From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
> > >Subject: [closed] pfps-14 "Social Meaning and RDF"
> > >Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:57:31 +0000
> > >
> > > > Subject: [closed] pfps-14 "Social Meaning and RDF"
> > > >
> > > > You raised made a last call comment [pfps-14] captured in:
> > > >
> > > >     http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-14
> > > >
> > > > The RDFCore WG has resolved:
> > > >
> > > > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0068.html
> > > >
> > > > to accept this comment,
> > > >
> > > > by removing the section on social meaning from the Concepts document,
> > > > per WG proposal:
> > > >
> > > > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0029.html
> > > >
> > > > Please reply to this email, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org indicating
> > > > whether this decision is acceptable.
> > >
> > >Hmm.  I don't view this as a comprehensive response to my comments on this
> > >issue.
> > >
> > >I particular my message referenced in the issue list doesn't even mention
> > >the section on social meaning.
> > >
> > >I await identification of other changes that may be done in response to
> > >this comment.
> > >
> > > > Thank you for your attention,
> > > >
> > > > #g
> > >
> > >
> > >peter
> >
> > -------------------
> > Graham Klyne
> > <GK@NineByNine.org>
> > PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E

------------
Graham Klyne          _________
GK@ninebynine.org  ___|_o_o_o_|_¬
                    \____________/
(nb Helva)       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   @Cliveden, River Thames

Received on Sunday, 10 August 2003 07:55:38 UTC