- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 07:28:09 -0600
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, <timbl@w3.org>
Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote: > Thank you for drawing attention to this issue. Do you consider this > already covered Oops, sorry -- I mentally categorized this with Tim and not Dan... Anyway, the point I wanted to make is that there was not unanimous agreement on this point. I believe that some felt that it was not the place of the spec to say such a thing. (Graham Klyne has already argued this point in a previous message.) Anyway, I think this thread should be linked in. That is <http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-interpretation> :discussedBy <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001JanMar/0103.html> . Oh, and did you forward your list of DanC issues to DanC and TimBL? -- Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>| my.info <http://www.aaronsw.com> | <http://my.theinfo.org> AIM: JediOfPi | ICQ: 33158237| the future of news, today
Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2001 08:30:53 UTC