Re: Datatypes text

Seems reasonable on a quick survey.

#g
--

At 23:05 17/06/03 +0300, Jeremy Carroll wrote:


>Graham, Pat, Patrick,
>
>Readiong the minutes of the 2nd May I see that I was meant to discuss with 
>you
>the text in msg
>
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0368
>
>I believe the major concern was with the first sentence, and that Pat was
>going to suggest a rewording to broaden it.
>
>I have currently put the text as is in the editors draft at:
>
>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#section-Datatypes
>
>Patrick suggested:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0006.html
>
>"The datatype abstraction used in RDF is compatible with
>  XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes..."
>
>as the first sentence, which is certainly an improvement.
>
>Jeremy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E