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, todayReceived on Tuesday, 13 March 2001 08:30:53 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 18:22:08 GMT