- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:53:31 -0400
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: "'wsawg public'" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 10:55:36AM -0400, Champion, Mike wrote: > > "New Web Services technologies, developed by W3C Web > > Services WGs, SHOULD be mapped to RDF." > > Sigh, I can sortof live with this, but it implies that the all-too-busy WG's > really should be doing the mapping (although they can get to Recommendation > status if they don't). I would be happier with Chris' original wording, > which implies that the WGs should themselves that the mapping is possible, > and that someone who sees a tangible benefit to doing the mapping can carry > it out. I understand. I just figured that the precedent was set with WSD, who are required to produce the mapping. I think that's quite reasonable, and it is only "should". > As Dave Orchard said quite clearly and forcefully yesterday, the membership > has spoken on this issue, and it's time to put it behind us. If the > semantic web community thinks the membership is misguided or insufficiently > visionary, SHOW US how a tighter coupling between web services and RDF can > improve our web services products. But we have to get the WSA Requirements > done first ... The W3C has presented ample demoware of various Semantic Web tools, such as Zakim and Jema. What more would you like to see that you could reasonably expect the W3C to produce (given that it isn't a software shop)? I mean that in all seriousness. What would it take to convince you? MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Wednesday, 22 May 2002 11:45:03 UTC