W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > October 2002

Re: Typed literals: current status

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 14:55:58 +0200
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-id: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDGEGMCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


> So that in fact, we'd never have non-typed literals in the abstract
> syntax ever?

Correct.
Your table looks correct - and I agree the "Classic" would go.

Jeremy

Received on Monday, 21 October 2002 08:56:56 EDT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Jeremy Carroll: "Re: Draft minutes of the RDFCore telecon, 2002-10-18"
Previous message: Graham Klyne: "Comments/questions on lBase (ACTION 2002-10-18#1)"
Maybe in reply to: Jeremy Carroll: "Typed literals: current status"
Next in thread: Jeremy Carroll: "Re: Typed literals: current status"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:28 EDT