- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:54:04 -0500
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, "www-webont-wg" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
At 10:42 AM +0000 3/5/02, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >I think there are three issues here and I would like to separate them: > >1: was rdf:parseType="daml:collection" a good idea? Does it need blessing? > >2: how does rdf:parseType="Literal" interact with RDF and OWL? > >3: is rdf:parseType="foobar" a sensible extensibility mechanism which OWL >can live with. Jeremy/Jonathan (et al) - For the sake of the WebOnt Wkg Group, many of whom haven't been as involved in RDF development as you, could you provide some pointers to things like rdf:parsetype and etc, and help us understand which is in RDF as accepted by the W3C (original rec), which are newer things under consideration by RDF Core, etc. I'm not really aiming this at the message above, but generally as this layering and RDF stuff goes forward, it is hard for some of us to follow - thanks JH -- Prof James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Dept of Computer Science http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler AV Williams Bldg 301-405-2696 (work) Univ of Maryland 301-405-6707 (Fax) College Park, MD 20853 USA
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2002 09:58:10 UTC