- From: greg fizpatrick <josesanjose@hotmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 17:29:18 CET
- To: timbl@w3.org, gf@medianet.org, paf@swip.net, connolly@w3.org, hjelm@w3.org, moore@cs.utk.edu, pregen@egenconsulting.com, bobmah@MIT.EDU, fdawson@earthlink.net, Doug.Royer@software.com, phill@myriad.com, David.Madeo@msdw.com, Bruce_Kahn@iris.com
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, sman@netscape.com
Tim wrote: Conclusion: very appropriate to map to RDF: a shoe-in. This would release a few tensions/ambiguities in iCaldendar as is, too, and remove much unnecessary extension stuff from the spec. Greg: I don't think shoe-in is exactly the right word for it. I have been hanging around on RDF lists for over a year now and I think it would be pretty adventurous to take iCal, which is already used in quite a few applicatins into that fray. Maybe from your vantage point you see a consensus which I don't grasp. I am going ask a new member of the SKiCAl WG, Jonas Liljegren, to write about this. Anyway I admire your gall. Here I am trepiditiously trying to sway the cautious and concerned IETF into making a considerably radical departure from current procedure and you are kind of saying; "hey lets go jump off Niagara Falls in a barrel, while were at it!" :-) Tim: The faint of heart could do it in XML and just check at intervals that they were really doing it in RDF :) So long as they didn't use XML attributes. Greg: Well, call me "faint", but we do SKiCal in XML and use XML attributes and would not dare at this stage to switch over to RDF. Not now in any case. Greg Sematic Web enthusiast me too ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2000 11:29:51 UTC