- From: dehora <bill@dehora.fsnet.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:04:19 +0100
- To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
: Brian McBride: : I'd like to take the opportunity of Bill's message to remind folks : of the RDFCore groups charter: : : http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter : : which states: : : The role of the RDFCore WG is to prepare the way for such work by : stabilizing the core RDF specifications. The RDF Core WG is neither : chartered to develop a new RDF syntax, nor to reformulate the RDF : model. : : We are working on RDF 1.1 rather than 2.0, though hopefully, we are : moving : things along in the right direction. : : I think this is in keeping with what Bill was suggesting. Hi Brian, I jumped the gun there! It seems though, that RDF is often under criticism from those that believe it expresses too much, and those that believe it expresses too little. That's a difficult place to be. Personally I'm never sure which it is, if indeed it's either. (My apologies, 1.1 will do nicely) regards, Bill de hOra
Received on Monday, 16 April 2001 15:07:40 UTC