optional list typing (was Re: Proposal to request Candidate Recommendation)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Proposal to request Candidate Recommendation
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:30:29 +0300

> 
> 
> >>We have already integrated some of the changes that RDF Core have told us
> >>about, and not others. Either we should go to CR with their last published
> >>WDs or we should go with all the decisions they have informed us about.
> >>The current state is unsatisfactory in that it presents an unnecessarily
> >>moving target for implementors.
> 
> >But there is no way to resolve except for us to wait until they move 
> >to PR, which would mean we sit around for a month doing nothing.
> 
> I tend to agree that it is better to move to CR than sit around waiting for 
> RDFCore to get to PR.
> 
> A specific issue I had in mind was that of "_:x rdf:type rdf:List", which is 
> still obligatory in S&AS (for OWL DL).

Changed as of this morning.  :-)

I've been plowing through the new draft of RDF Semantics, so I hadn't
gotten around to sending a message about the change to the group.  

> The latest editors draft of Test has the interesting discrepancy that the 
> triples are generated accordfing to the latest editors draft of RDF Syntax 
> (without these type triples), and so many of the DL tests get flagged as in 
> error - technically they are.
> 
> Jeremy

peter

Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2003 13:41:43 UTC