- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 13:40:23 +0200
- To: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi all, as an input to our call, here are the opinions about the ITS RDF representation question gathered so far. NOTE: I didn't asked for types of votes (pro, can live with, cannot live with, ...). So below is my interpretation of mails. Let's confirm this on the call. If the attendance on the call is low (thank you August holidays :) ) we may need to take a few more days via mail to gather additional votes. Talk to you soon, Felix 1) Have a non-normative reference to NIF Pro: Dave, Felix, Tadej, Karl Can live with: David, Jörg Cannot live with this: - 2a) Intent to have a standardized, that is normative RDF representation of ITS2. This could then not be NIF. It could be 2a) something based on NIF, e.g. moving the six URIs that we rely on (+ the ontology file?) Pro: David, Jörg Can live with this: - Cannot live with this: Dave, Felix, Tadej 2b) something completely different, yet to be defined. Pro: - Can live with this: Jörg Cannot live with this: Felix, Dave, David
Received on Wednesday, 14 August 2013 11:40:52 UTC