Re: [Request for Input] Linked Data Specifications

Dave Reynolds wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> A good idea.

My sentiments exactly :)

Michael, also worth mentioning RDFa, Turtle, N3?

and also any note on IRI or HTTP-bis?

can you bold the link to the SWAP publications / highlight in some way, 
as it's a pretty important one.

Perhaps more vocabs, perhaps sioc, org, dct, foaf and a pointer to a 
good resource for vocabs.

> Could I request you more clearly separate the formal specifications from
> the de facto community practice documents. The Change Set vocabulary, to
> pick one example, doesn't really have the same standing, adoption or
> level of scrutiny as the RFCs, does it?

and +1 to the above (re make them clearly distinct, not say CS is of the 
same standing as web standards!).

Best,

Nathan

Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 12:01:23 UTC