- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 13:34:26 +0100
- To: <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Hi Dan, I am looking at http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html where you say: @@what were bullets 1-3? the answer is further up the IRC log, my new comments in @@ @@bullet 1 16:01:08 [jjcscribe] guus: propose that there is a presentation syntax and an underlying syntax and a transform @@bullet 2 16:01:28 [jjcscribe] guus: some form of preservation of presentation syntax is requirement @@bullet 3 16:02:19 [jjcscribe] guus: propose also RDF is underlying syntax 16:04:40 [jjcscribe] deb we should present our solution in a way that makes XML and antiRDF people happy @@bullet 4 16:05:30 [jjcscribe] guus: propose that the presentation syntax is in XML 16:05:39 [jjcscribe] (last bit seems controversial) 16:07:02 [jjcscribe] ora; M&S says RDF/XML is one serialization 16:07:37 [ora] "only one" serialization, others may exist 16:07:52 [ora] not "the only one" 16:08:19 [DanC] but until lots of consumers grok another RDF syntax, it is the only one @@note it was significant that bullet 4 did not get consensus 16:08:24 [jjcscribe] AGREEMENT: to the bullers 1-3 of above proposal, (not that presentation syntax is XML - but the other ones) Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 08:34:44 UTC