- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 10:18:34 -0500
- To: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
At 16:07 +0100 3/31/03, Ian Horrocks wrote: >On March 28, Jeremy Carroll writes: >> >> >> >> >BTW, we didn't specify anything about what a datatype theory ought to >> >say (e.g., it could map all integers to the same domain element). Do >> >we want/need to say that datatype theories must be consistent with >> >XMLSchema, or some such? >> >> Procedurally, shouldn't this be made as a last call comment on S&AS after >> Monday? > >If you say so - procedure is not my strong suit :-) > >Ian > >> >> Jeremy >> > > Would this go in S&AS or Test? Since Test didn't go to LC, I think that would be the easiest place to mention this and we could do that at any time. If it needs to go in S&AS, we will see where we stand after LC - that is, we may get LC comments with respect to datatypes that we would address by adding such words. Also, since this doesn't change the design of the langauge (i.e. we are all assuming the handling must be consistent with the datatype definitions, so it's just a matter of whether we feel we need to add text to the normative definition) it is something we can do editorially without having to do a new LC -- so, in essence, process is simply not to do anything to S&AS at this time. Also, please remember what we were reminded of at last week's telecon -- by agreeing to move to LC, members of THIS working group have agreed we have the design right, and should not be sending LC complaints - you've had your shot over the past 18 months - time for the rest of the world to bring up their issues. -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 240-731-3822 (Cell) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Monday, 31 March 2003 10:18:59 UTC