Re: Comments on draft spec (intro wordsmithing, ns rule bug)

Thanks Dan.

On 12/02/07, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:

> > Also, might it be preferable to show this as Turtle/N3, to make it
> > clearer that is isn't just some weird kind of canonical XML
> > expression? (Or at least add another sentence to stress the point).
>
> Hmm... what's wierd about it? It's totally ordinary RDF/XML, no?

What I had in mind was the perception of someone not familiar with
RDF, where it could look like the object of the exercise was to change
the XML syntax to a normalised form (and for such purposes RDF/XML
syntax might seem strange).  On reflection though I guess anyone
likely to be looking at this spec is unlikely to need a hint on that
point.

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 

http://dannyayers.com