- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 10:42:18 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
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