public-rdf-comments@w3.org from November 2013: by author

Adrian Pohl

Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-163: Determine if @type overloading is acceptable for JSON-LD 1.0 (Monday, 4 November)

Alex Milowski

[RESOLVED] Re: Surrogate Code Points in Tests? (Sunday, 10 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Collection / Grammar Issue (Sunday, 10 November)

Andy Seaborne

Re: Escaped characters in RDF-1.1 N-Triples literals for Canonical documents (Thursday, 28 November)
Re: Turtle tests : Case-sensitivity of base and prefix directives (Wednesday, 27 November)
Re: TriG compatibility with N-Quads (Saturday, 23 November)
Re: Bare collections in Turtle and TriG (Friday, 22 November)
Re: Escaped characters in RDF-1.1 N-Triples literals for Canonical documents (Monday, 18 November)
Re: TriG compatibility with N-Quads (Monday, 18 November)
Re: Awkward TriG compatibility with N3 (Monday, 18 November)
Re: Bare collections in Turtle and TriG (Monday, 18 November)

Dave Beckett

[RESOLVED] Re: Which characters are allowed in IRIREF in Turtle 2013? (Sunday, 3 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Please remove HTML5 as a normative reference for Turtle 2013 (Saturday, 2 November)

David Booth

[RESOLVED] Re: [Turtle] Please show/explain hexadecimal-encoded characters in comments (Wednesday, 6 November)
Re: [Turtle] Please show/explain hexadecimal-encoded characters in comments (Wednesday, 6 November)

Dr. A. Joseph Rockmore

Re: reified statements in Turtle (Monday, 18 November)

Eric Prud'hommeaux

Re: [Turtle] Please show/explain hexadecimal-encoded characters in comments (Wednesday, 6 November)
Re: Merging and improving the Turtle test suite(s) (Wednesday, 6 November)
Re: Turtle "coverage" test suite issues with N-Triples (Sunday, 3 November)
Absolute URIs for Turtle tests (Sunday, 3 November)
Re: reified statements in Turtle (Sunday, 3 November)
Re: Surrogate Code Points in Tests? (Sunday, 3 November)
Re: Collection / Grammar Issue (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: [Turtle] Please show/explain hexadecimal-encoded characters in comments (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Which characters are allowed in IRIREF in Turtle 2013? (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Turtle tests blank ID patches, and EARL report for Serd (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Turtle version naming? (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Please remove HTML5 as a normative reference for Turtle 2013 (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Please remove HTML5 as a normative reference for Turtle 2013 (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Language-tagged strings in Turtle (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Problem with Hash based Linked Data URIs (Saturday, 2 November)
Re: Increased lookahead requirements in the Turtle draft (Saturday, 2 November)

Gregg Kellogg

Re: TriG examples not conforming to grammar (Sunday, 17 November)
Error in RDF/JSON example 7 (Thursday, 14 November)
Re: Turtle implementation report for RDF::Trine (ACTION-268) (Sunday, 3 November)

Gregory Williams

[RESOLVED] Re: Merging and improving the Turtle test suite(s) (Wednesday, 6 November)
Re: PROPOSED to RESOLVE ISSUE-127 with Canonical N-Triples (Wednesday, 6 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Turtle implementation report for RDF::Trine (Wednesday, 6 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Absolute URIs for Turtle tests (Wednesday, 6 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Turtle "coverage" test suite issues with N-Triples (Wednesday, 6 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Turtle implementation report for RDF::Trine (ACTION-268) (Wednesday, 6 November)

Guus Schreiber

New RDF 1.1 publications & request for implementer feedback (Sunday, 10 November)
Re: comments on N-Quads, N-Triples and TriG CR (ISSUE-170, ISSUE-171, ISSUE-172) (Thursday, 7 November)

Henry Story

Re: [RESOLVED] reminder: ack needed Re: Problem with Hash based Linked Data URIs (Wednesday, 20 November)

Jan Wielemaker

[RESOLVED] Re: Turtle version naming? (Tuesday, 5 November)

Peter Ansell

Re: Escaped characters in RDF-1.1 N-Triples literals for Canonical documents (Thursday, 28 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Turtle tests : Case-sensitivity of base and prefix directives (Wednesday, 27 November)
Re: Escaped characters in RDF-1.1 N-Triples literals for Canonical documents (Monday, 18 November)
Escaped characters in RDF-1.1 N-Triples literals for Canonical documents (Sunday, 17 November)
Re: Turtle tests : Case-sensitivity of base and prefix directives (Thursday, 7 November)
Re: N-Quads backwards compatibility with respect to UTF-8/US-ASCII (Thursday, 7 November)
N-Quads and N-Triples Candidate Recommendations and Normative links to RDF-1.1 Concepts (Thursday, 7 November)

Richard Smith

[RESOLVED] Re: TriG compatibility with N-Quads (Sunday, 24 November)
Re: TriG compatibility with N-Quads (Wednesday, 20 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Awkward TriG compatibility with N3 (Wednesday, 20 November)
Re: TriG examples not conforming to grammar (Sunday, 17 November)
TriG compatibility with N-Quads (Sunday, 17 November)
Awkward TriG compatibility with N3 (Sunday, 17 November)
TriG examples not conforming to grammar (Sunday, 17 November)
Bare collections in Turtle and TriG (Sunday, 17 November)
Underspecification of prefixed names in Turtle (Sunday, 17 November)

Sandro Hawke

Re: Awkward TriG compatibility with N3 (Wednesday, 20 November)

Simon Grant

Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-163: Determine if @type overloading is acceptable for JSON-LD 1.0 (Saturday, 2 November)

Simon Reinhardt

[RESOLVED] Re: Please remove HTML5 as a normative reference for Turtle 2013 (Sunday, 3 November)
[RESOLVED] Re: Language-tagged strings in Turtle (Sunday, 3 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of art.barstow@nokia.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Monday, 25 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of bs3131@att.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Monday, 25 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of eric@semanticweb.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of Fabien.Gandon@inria.fr

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Monday, 25 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of gavin@carothers.name

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Wednesday, 27 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of george.thomas1@hhs.gov

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Thursday, 21 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of glenn@skynav.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of hiroyuki.aizu@toshiba.co.jp

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Sunday, 24 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of ian.horrocks@cs.ox.ac.uk

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Monday, 25 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of jim.bell@hp.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Saturday, 23 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of john.goodwin@ordnancesurvey.co.uk

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Thursday, 28 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of kidehen@openlinksw.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of lbolstad@opera.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Wednesday, 27 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of markus.gylling@gmail.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of mlvarez@w3.org

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of mountie@paygate.net

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Monday, 25 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 29 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of olszewsl@oclc.org

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Friday, 22 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of raman@google.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Thursday, 21 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of richard@cyganiak.de

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Thursday, 28 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of rsingh@opengeospatial.org

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Monday, 25 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of singer@apple.com

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Tuesday, 19 November)

WBS Mailer on behalf of w3c_ac@joanneum.at

[wbs] response to 'Call for Review: JSON-LD 1.0, JSON-LD 1.0 Processing Algorithms and API are W3C Proposed Recommendations' (Wednesday, 27 November)

Last message date: Friday, 29 November 2013 09:54:18 UTC