- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:08:48 +0100
- 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 UTC