W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > November 2006

Re: on application/xml and RDF statements vs pictures of statements

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:44:54 -0500
Message-ID: <c70bc85d0611021144v467eefd4q278b5eefcbbfd760@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Danny Ayers" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, "Chimezie Ogbuji" <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>, www-archive@w3.org

I didn't see this finding mentioned anywhere, but it seems to me to be
germane to most of the issues brought up in this discussion;

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect

Mark.

On 11/2/06, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 02/11/06, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
> > we figure they're statements. Details attached.
>
>
> Nov 02 12:20:23 <DanC>    because in some sense, when you fire up an RDF
> tool, you the consumer are saying "never mind what the author told the web;
> I'm willing to take the risk that he meant RDF"
>
> This seems reasonable to a (distinct) point. Local interpretation of the
> material is fine, republication of the material is troublesome. With "never
> mind...", any provenance chain is broken.
>
> Cheers,
> Danny.
>
>
>
> --
>
> http://dannyayers.com
Received on Thursday, 2 November 2006 19:45:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:00 GMT