W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > October 2006

Re: GRDDL Spec Review (issue status, esp #issue-output-formats)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:52:22 -0500
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Cc: public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1161625942.4182.49.camel@dirk>

On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 03:36 +0100, Harry Halpin wrote:
[...]
> 2) So, did we resolve the RDF output format issue - cause it sure sounds
> like we did in the spec in favor of RDF/XML.

I just did the status blurb, which, I hope, addresses that question:

"A number of issues remain to be decided by the working group; this
draft takes a position on some of them."
 -- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec 1.133


So #issue-output-formats remains to be decided by the WG, though
the spec does take a position on it. You rightly point out
inconsistencies in the position taken...

> "a source document, that preserves its meaning in an RDF/XML representation"
> 
> "the source document, that preserves its meaning in an RDF/XML 
> representation."
> 
> "an RDF/XML rendition" (this one occurs twice)
> 
> In all these cases, just replace "RDF/XML" with "RDF".

Yes, I agree. done in 1.134.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 23 October 2006 17:52:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:46 GMT