W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2003

Re: Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2003-08-15

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:08:48 +0100
Message-ID: <3F3CBF40.1040701@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
CC: danbri@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org



Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:

> 
>>10: Denotation of rdf:XMLLiteral
>>	[[
>>	PROPOSE: accept the definition of rdf:XMLLiteral value 
>>space from
>>
>>	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0452
>>
>>	and action concepts editors to integrate it in the 
>>editors draft, using 
>>	editorial discretion.
>>	]]
>>
> 
> I don't understand this proposal, since the WG has already
> discussed the definition in 
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0452
> 
> during last telecon, identified problems with it, and tasked
> Jeremy to write up a revised version.
> 
> The issues identified during the last telecon are not IMO editorial
> issues.
> 


Sorry - we seem to be at cross-purposes - are you happy with:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0185

which is a minor edit of

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0153

about which you said:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0160

"I'm satisfied with this definition."


If that's OK let's change to that message being the one quoted in the 
proposal. I don't think we should get into an argument about how big a 
difference is editorial!

vis -

	[[
	PROPOSE: accept the definition of rdf:XMLLiteral from

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0185

	and action concepts editors to integrate it in the
         editors draft, using  editorial discretion.
	]]

Obviously, if you at any stage think I have overreached editorial 
discretion then I would welcome correction.

Jeremy
Received on Friday, 15 August 2003 07:11:23 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:59:38 EDT