- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 11:42:42 +0100
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
It seems that you just did propose ... I will if you were not proposing it ... Of course, Nick has a point in his comment. Jeremy Brian McBride wrote: > At 23:16 08/04/2003 +0300, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > >> gk: >> > To kick things off, I'll make a strawman proposal: >> > [[ >> > It is proposed that the RDF namespace URIs remain the same as those in >> > previous versions of RDF, and that the text cited above is removed >> from RDF >> > Concepts. >> >> > Rationale: we have been using the same namespace URIs for some time >> now >> > with the "new RDF", and there has been little indication from the >> > user/developer community that this causes any great problems. >> > ]] >> >> Second - or alternatively lets just take editorial perogative and make >> the >> change. That was a note to LC reviewers, the LC review period is over, >> the >> note is past its sell-by-date. > > > Its not quite that simple. We have a last call comment > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0490.html > > which hasn't made it to the issues list yet, so I've added it: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#efth-01 > > If someone were to propose a resolution this week, perhaps along the > lines of: > > [[ > Considering that: > > o the WG, have in multiple editions of WD's indicated its intention to > not to change the URI REFS for the RDF and RDFS namespaces > > o the WG explicitly requested feedback on this intention > > o very little negative feedback has been received > > o there is significant cost and complexity in changing the namespace > URI REFs > > the RDFCore WG resolves > > o not to change the URI REFS for the RDF and RDFS namespaces > > o to ACTION the document editor's to make such editorial changes as > are required by this decision > > ]] > > Brian > >
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2003 06:43:01 UTC