Re: rdf:text ready for LC?

> Boris and I had several iterations over the remaining Editorial Notes.
> We have resolved all we could, the thing remaining is that we marked both
> 
>    rtfn:compare
> 
> and
> 
>    rtfn:length
> 
> as AT RISK.
> 
> If that is ok for LC (we think that the current definiton of the both 
> functions is water-proof, but we could still remove it if there were 
> serious objections) then the spec [1] is ready for last call in our opinion.
> 
> Axel & Boris
> 
> 1. http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec

Sounds great.   

BTW, I've resolved my problem with the existing text forbidding the use
of rdf:text in RDF.  (I still think the text should be changed as I
proposed, but I'm not going to fight about it any more, since I think
the language I don't like will produce less harm than a continuing to
fight about it.)

In short, speaking as a reviewer, I think this is ready for Last Call.

    -- Sandro

Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2009 14:10:27 UTC