- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 13:48:30 +0000
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Yes, this is acceptable to me. #g -- At 12:44 PM 11/5/01 +0000, Brian McBride wrote: >Graham, > >In > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001AprJun/0028.html > >you raised an issue with the RDF M&S specification which was recorded in > > http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-qnames-as-attrib-values > >as > > Currently, resource identifier values specified in attributes such as > "about", "resource", "aboutEach" and "type" are specified as > URI-references. The same resources used in element or attribute names > are specified as Qnames. Other specifications permit the use of Qnames > in attribute values. It would enhance readability of RDF were also to > do so. > >On 26th October 2001, the RDFCore WG decided to postpone consideration of >this issue until a future WG. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0582.html > >Could you please respond, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org indicating >whether this decision is acceptable. > >Brian McBride >RDFCore co-chair > ------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Monday, 5 November 2001 08:53:38 UTC