W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: issue number requested: was: Re: the meaning of RDF tokens

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 13:20:31 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

At 11:04 17/02/2003 -0500, Frank Manola wrote:

>Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
>>Subject: Re: the meaning of RDF tokens
>>Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 10:10:33 -0500
>>>>Only one last-call comment identifier is needed here, I think.  However, I
>>>>do not see any in the last-call comment list at
>>>>         http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues
>>>You won't see it there.  There are two sets of change identifiers.  The 
>>>ones listed at the URL you've cited are issues that have been referred 
>>>by the Editors of the relevant documents to the WG for decision.  In 
>>>addition, each Editor is maintaining an internal set of change 
>>>identifiers for those changes they have accepted (as I have this one) 
>>>and are going to go ahead and fix.
>>You mean without input from the rest of the working group, or even
>>elevating it to an official comment?
>>I am distinctly unhappy with this way of dealing with my comments.
>Your original comment was addressed to the Primer, and I've been dealing 
>with it on that basis.  That didn't make it any less "official", it just 
>meant I could decide myself whether I thought I could make the changes 
>necessary to the Primer to deal with it.  I'll be happy to raise it as a 
>general issue to be addressed in all the documents if you like (and in 
>fact will do so now).
>Brian, can we have an issue number for this please?

I have recorded comment


The WG will consider this comment and get back to you.

Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 08:21:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:20 UTC