W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2006

RE: Go ahead with pub

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 15:08:49 +0100
Message-ID: <86FE9B2B91ADD04095335314BE6906E871BD00@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Kendall Clark" <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, "RDF Data Access Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

Done and committed to CVS.

	Andy


-------- Original Message --------
> From: Kendall Clark <>
> Date: 2 October 2006 13:30
> 
> On Oct 2, 2006, at 6:06 AM, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> 
> > > I would like that to be deleted because it's confusing on several
> > > levels (e.g., why doesn't it apply in optional?) I don't
> > > particularly care that it'd done before pub, but it seems an easy
> > > enough move. I mean, it doesn't *change* anything!
> > 
> > This text does seem out of date: the objection from DaveB was
> > withdrawn and I can't find a record of any other (I just checked
with
> > Steve). 
> > 
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#disjunction
> > 
> > It is confusing.  But I'd like the chair's permission as
confirmation.
> 
> It's on *my* list of document warts, so, yes, please remove it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Kendall
Received on Monday, 2 October 2006 14:09:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:27 GMT