W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2003

Re: [RDFinXHTML-35] Syntax and semantics for embedding RDF in XHTML

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 15:58:16 -0500
To: connolly@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org
Cc: "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson), sean@mysterylights.com
Message-Id: <200304011558.16214.reagle@w3.org>

On March 12 2003 Dan Connolly wrote:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Mar/0019.html
>I'm not holding my breath, but I sorta expect that
>in the next few weeks to months, something will come of
>the momentum built at last week's meeting; I'm
>sorta hoping to see something from Pemberton,
>Miller, Beckett, et. al.

Dan,

At one of those meetings (February 13th [1]) Tim stated that he felt that 
the problem was that in part there was no coordinated plan. I agreed to 
draw up a plan which I've (roughly) drafted at [2], but a plan won't 
succeed, "without a forum and heart-beat. Fortunately, this is the TAG's 
RDFinXHTML-35 assigned to Dan Connolly." (Otherwise, I'm just blowing smoke 
circles for myself <smile/>.) In your text above you seem content to let 
the issue lay until enough consensus builds around a proposal. This seems 
counter to the belief that there will be no progress without advocacy with 
commitment and milestones.

I continue to be willing to help on this topic (getting feedback on the 
rough requirements and deliverables, and obtaining and following up with 
commitments) in the context of the TAG issue if you think it worthwhile. 
Otherwise, should I consider my action discharged?

[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/03/13-w3c-irc
[2] http://www.w3.org/2003/03/rdf-in-xml.html
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2003 16:44:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:17 GMT