Re: Concrete types: next steps?

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider ([email protected])
Date: 02/01/01


From: Dan Connolly <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Concrete types: next steps?
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:11:33 -0600

> Frank van Harmelen wrote:
> > 
> > After the teleconf last night, I've tried to summarise the current situation as I perceive it. Perhaps this is useful to find a way forward.
> > 
> > Frank.
> >    ---
> > 
> 
> > - Currently the only proposal on the table is 
> 
> Er... well.. I don't claim mine is complete, but since
> I don't agree that yours is complete either, I suggest

I would be very interested in comments indicating where the current
proposal is not complete.

> that this is also on the table:
> 
>   Using XML Schema Datatypes in RDF and DAML+OIL
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/01/ct24
> 
> Tim and I chatted about it yesterday, and I now think I
> know how to fill in the gaps. Oh for an hour or two
> to write and think...
> 


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST