Charles, You made a last call comment captured in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#chas-01 The RDF Core WG has resolved http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0128.html to reject this comment on the grounds that the original reasons for removal remain valid: * We had good feedback that it lived badly in RDF and as such was little implemented or used. * It broke layering by looking inside URIs rather than dealing with them as identifiers. * Felt more like a RDF/XML syntax thing than part of the RDF model and as such it mixed badly with triples. * Worked badly with rdf:bagID - the interactions were never well understood. * Experienced practitioners recommended against using it. Please reply to this email, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org indicating whether this decision is acceptable. DaveReceived on Monday, 7 April 2003 11:45:07 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 24 April 2007 12:17:12 GMT