Re: [closed] xmlsch-12 capricious syntax

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote:

[...]

> 
> The WG did not approve a formal response to this disposition,
> because owing to an error on my part we did not have your
> response in front of us; my apologies.  We look forward to
> the work you project for the future on RDF syntax.

Hi Michael,

I wonder whether you're not having the response to hand was entirely 
your fault.  I just found that my disposition of comments doc had a link 
to the wrong response.  Sorry about that if it impeded your work.  Now 
fixed.

I've recorded this as a "no response" in our comments disposition with a 
link to your mail.  Let me know if this is not ok.

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-12

Brian