- From: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:06:31 -0400
- To: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Apr 20, 2011, at 13:04, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider wrote: > From: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com> > Subject: [ALL] FTF1 Minutes Update > Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:38:12 -0500 > >> Hi all, >> >> Minutes for the FTF1 were not accepted on today's call due to two >> separate email threads that resulted in -1 votes on the mailing list >> after the meeting. I took an action to add notes into the minutes to >> point to those threads. >> >> 1) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0366.html >> >> This comment was added to 13 April's minutes: >> [[ >> See post-FTF1 email discussion regarding this resolution at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0366.html >> ]] >> >> 2) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html >> >> Nathan commented on a proposal which was not adopted, so I did not >> change the minutes. >> >> My understanding is that the minutes now reflect both the meeting and >> the post-meeting comments. >> >> Regards, >> Dave > > > Hmm. The emails that I was thinking of are > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0307.html > from Antoine Zimmermann, and > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0309.html > from Lee Feigenbaum > both of which have -1 on > PROPOSED: Mark xs:string as archaic for use in RDF, recommending use of > plain literals instead. Recommend that systems silently convert > xs:string data to plain literals. It looks like those messages and the one I noted (from Lee, number 0366) are in the same thread. > > In subsequence email, I tried to point out that there is an invalid > assumption in the thread. Nonetheless, the discussion should probably > be noted in the F2F minutes, which I have done. I agree. Regards, Dave > > peter
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 13:07:02 UTC