Re: [RDFTM, All] Note proposal - rdftm survey

Dear Ralph,

we do not plan any revisions to the document,
so the "Status of this Document" section can be changed.

I apologize, I didn't remind to tell something about that part.
Thank you.

Best regards,
Valentina

On Dec 12, 2005, at 9:45 PM, Ralph R. Swick wrote:

> Valentina, are there any editorial remarks that should be added to
> the Status of this Document section?  Or should I only update the
> third paragraph of that section to say that the Working Group does
> not plan any further revisions to this document?
>
> At 10:58 AM 11/17/2005 +0100, Valentina Presutti wrote:
>
>> Dear Guus,
>>
>> exactly. The document didn't change since the last publication and we
>> didn't have new comments after that.
>> (I wasn't sure about what information were needed)
>>
>> So, the TF will wait for the Working Group to decide about the Note
>> publication.
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Valentina
>>
>>
>>
>>> Valentina,
>>>
>>> OK, you provided precisely the information I was looking. For a new
>>> publication it is good practice to summarize the changes. So, here,
>>> no comments since last publication, no changes, so a good reason to
>>> go for a Working Group Note.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Guus
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Ciao,
>>>> Valentina
>>>> On Nov 16, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Guus Schreiber wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Valentina Presutti wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>> the RDFTM Task Force would like to propose
>>>>>> the "2005-03-29" W3C Working Group draft of the
>>>>>> "A Survey of RDF/Topic Maps Interoperability Proposals"
>>>>>> for W3C Public Note publication:
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdftm-survey/
>
>