At 11:09 11/10/2002 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: >Brian, > >In #rdfig (just before >http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2002-10-11#T16-04-29 >) we discovered the RDF issues list doesn't >say anything about rdf:nodeID. > >I found the WG decision, confirmed with Dave B, >and updated the issues list, moving the >issue from 'postponed' to 'attention developers'. I had left under postponed because it is still not possible to represent all possible rdf graphs in the rdf/xml syntax. However, we have dealt with the major issue and I don't think anyone has complained about the others. I certainly don't intend to move it back again. Thanks Dan. BrianReceived on Monday, 14 October 2002 03:04:19 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 24 April 2007 12:17:10 GMT