www-tag@w3.org from February 2003 by author

Azubuko Obele

• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)

Bill de hÓra

• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• Re: REST as formalism of RFC 2396 was ... what the SW needs from the Web... (Saturday, 1 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Saturday, 1 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Saturday, 1 February)

Bjoern Hoehrmann

• Re: "How to Compare URIs": %xx for non-reserved characters (Sunday, 23 February)
• Re: Posted uri-comp-4 (Saturday, 22 February)

Bullard, Claude L (Len)

• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE:[Minut es] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Monday, 17 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Friday, 14 February)
• RE: site metadata discussion is overly voluminous (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: DeepLinking-25: Finding updated (Monday, 3 February)

Champion, Mike

• RE: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Wednesday, 19 February)

Chris Haynes

• Re: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Sunday, 23 February)

Chris Lilley

• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: URIEquivalence-15: characters in RFC 2396 (was: Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (..., IRIEverywhere-27, ...)) (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• [uriMediaType-9] Layout of MIME Media Types pages (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 24 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (site metadata, namespaceDocument-8) (Thursday, 27 February)
• Re: [webarch] example diagrams of HTTP and Apache (Wednesday, 26 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: "How to Compare URIs": %xx for non-reserved characters (Wednesday, 19 February)
• [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Thursday, 13 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Fwd: link metadata cannot override server media type (Friday, 7 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Thursday, 6 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Tuesday, 4 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Monday, 3 February)
• Re: DeepLinking-25: Finding updated (Monday, 3 February)

Chris Wilper

• RE: OpenURL, still active? (Monday, 24 February)

Dan Connolly

• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: siteData-36: strawman (Thursday, 27 February)
• Re: OpenURL, still active? (Tuesday, 25 February)
• Re: [Agenda] 17 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (deepLinking-25, namespaceDocument-8, xmlFunctions-34, metadata hook) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML) (Tuesday, 11 February)
• [URIEquivalence-15] Choosing and comparing URIs (Monday, 10 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Monday, 3 February)

Dare Obasanjo

• RE: [xml-dev] The subsetting has begun (Friday, 21 February)
• RE: Minimal RDDL [NamespaceDocument-8] (Friday, 14 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Tuesday, 11 February)

Dave Beckett

• [RDFinXHTML-35] Pointers for this issue (Thursday, 13 February)

David Booth

• Re: DeepLinking-25: Finding updated (Tuesday, 4 February)

David Jacobs

• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)

David Orchard

• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Interacting with a URI, when is the result not a representation and what is it called. (Wednesday, 5 February)
• RE: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)

Elliotte Rusty Harold

• The subsetting has begun (Friday, 21 February)
• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Thursday, 20 February)
• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Thursday, 20 February)
• Re: Minimal RDDL [NamespaceDocument-8] (Saturday, 15 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Thursday, 13 February)

Glenn A. Adams

• RE: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Sunday, 16 February)

Graham Klyne

• URIs vs methods for metadata (Friday, 21 February)
• Re: DeepLinking-25: Finding updated (Tuesday, 4 February)

Henry S. Thompson

• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Friday, 7 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Thursday, 6 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)
• [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)

Ian B. Jacobs

• [Minutes] 24 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (site metadata, namespaceDocument-8) (Thursday, 27 February)
• [Publication] 21 Feb 2003 Editor's Draft of Architecture of the WWW (Saturday, 22 February)
• [Agenda] 24 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (deepLinking-25, namespaceDocument-8, xmlFunctions-34, binaryXML-30, contentPresentation-26) (Wednesday, 19 February)
• TAG Finding: "Deep Linking" in the World Wide Web (Monday, 17 February)
• Summary of TAG activity from 10 Jan 2003 to 11 Feb 2003 (Friday, 14 February)
• RE: [Agenda] 17 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (deepLinking-25, namespaceDocument-8, xmlFunctions-34, metadata hook) (Thursday, 13 February)
• Re: [Agenda] 17 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (deepLinking-25, namespaceDocument-8, xmlFunctions-34, metadata hook) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• [Agenda] 17 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (deepLinking-25, namespaceDocument-8, xmlFunctions-34, metadata hook) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)
• [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)
• [Minutes] 3 Feb 2003 TAG teleconference (Monday, 3 February)

james anderson

• Re: DeepLinking-25: Finding updated (Tuesday, 4 February)

Jan Algermissen

• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)

Jeff Bone

• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)

Jeffrey Winter

• RE: Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 19 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)

Jeremy Dunck

• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Thursday, 13 February)

Jonathan Borden

• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)
• REST as formalism of RFC 2396 was ... what the SW needs from the Web... (Saturday, 1 February)

Jonathan Marsh

• Re: Options for dealing with IDs (introducing 4a) (Friday, 7 February)
• fragmentInXML-28: WSDL component designators (Monday, 3 February)

Jos De_Roo

• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)

Joshua Allen

• RE: Site metadata; my preference (Thursday, 20 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)

Julian Reschke

• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)

Karl Dubost

• Re: siteData-36: strawman (Friday, 28 February)

Larry Masinter

• RE: "How to Compare URIs": %xx for non-reserved characters (Tuesday, 18 February)
• "How to Compare URIs": %xx for non-reserved characters (Tuesday, 18 February)
• Re: [HTTPSubstrate-16] Propoposed criticsm of RFC3205 (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: A simpler solution to %7e vs %7E vs ~ in namespace comparison (Tuesday, 11 February)
• A simpler solution to %7e vs %7E vs ~ in namespace comparison (Saturday, 8 February)
• Re: [HTTPSubstrate-16] Propoposed criticsm of RFC3205 (Saturday, 8 February)

Liam Quin

• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Tuesday, 4 February)

Mark Baker

• Site metadata; am I a hot TAG issue, or not? (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: [HTTPSubstrate-16] Propoposed criticsm of RFC3205 (Saturday, 8 February)
• Re: Interacting with a URI, when is the result not a representation and what is it called. (Thursday, 6 February)

Martin Duerst

• Re: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Monday, 24 February)
• Re: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Saturday, 22 February)
• RE: "How to Compare URIs": %xx for non-reserved characters (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: "How to Compare URIs": %xx for non-reserved characters (Wednesday, 19 February)
• RE: Draft 2 of "How to Compare URIs" (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: Draft 2 of "How to Compare URIs" (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: Minimal RDDL [NamespaceDocument-8] (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: Fwd: proposed text on IRIEverywhere-27 (Monday, 17 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Wednesday, 5 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Wednesday, 5 February)
• RE: URIEquivalence-15: characters in RFC 2396 (was: Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (..., IRIEverywhere-27, ...)) (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: proposed text on IRIEverywhere-27 (Tuesday, 4 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Monday, 3 February)
• URIEquivalence-15: influence on IRIs (was: Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (..., IRIEverywhere-27, ...)) (Monday, 3 February)
• Fwd: proposed text on IRIEverywhere-27 (Monday, 3 February)
• URIEquivalence-15: characters in RFC 2396 (was: Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (..., IRIEverywhere-27, ...)) (Monday, 3 February)
• URIEquivalence-15: equivalence of %7e/%7E/~ (was:Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (... IRIEverywhere-27,...)) (Monday, 3 February)

Massimo Marchiori

• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)

Michael Mealling

• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Thursday, 20 February)
• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Wednesday, 19 February)

Mike Champion

• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Thursday, 20 February)
• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)

Miles Sabin

• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)

Misha Wolf

• RE: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Saturday, 22 February)
• RE: A simpler solution to %7e vs %7E vs ~ in namespace comparison (Saturday, 8 February)

Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM

• Re: Posted uri-comp-4 (Friday, 21 February)
• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Thursday, 20 February)
• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Wednesday, 19 February)

noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

• Re: A simpler solution to %7e vs %7E vs ~ in namespace comparison (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Thursday, 6 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Thursday, 6 February)

Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com

• RE: [Minutes] 24 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (site metadata, namespaceDocument-8) (Thursday, 27 February)
• RE: [Minutes] 24 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (site metadata, namespaceDocument-8) (Thursday, 27 February)
• RE: Site metadata; my preference (Thursday, 20 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Tuesday, 18 February)
• Dictionaries are Books, but Cards in a Card Catalogue are not... (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Site metadata; my preference (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 18 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• RE: RDDL and XML Schema instances are not valid representations of namespaces (Sunday, 2 February)
• RE: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)

Paul Cotton

• RE: fragmentInXML-28: WSDL component designators (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: [Agenda] 17 Feb 2003 TAG teleconf (deepLinking-25, namespaceDocument-8, xmlFunctions-34, metadata hook) (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Thursday, 6 February)

Paul Grosso

• xmlFunctions-34 (Thursday, 27 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)

Paul Prescod

• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 19 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Friday, 14 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)

Richard Tobin

• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Thursday, 6 February)

Rick Jelliffe

• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE:[Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Sunday, 16 February)

Robin Berjon

• Re: [binaryXML-30] Binary XML problem statement. (Thursday, 27 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (httpRange-14, arch doc, IRIEverywhere-27, binaryXML-30, xmlProfiles-29) (Tuesday, 4 February)

Roger L. Costello

• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 18 February)

Roy T. Fielding

• [webarch] example diagrams of HTTP and Apache (Friday, 21 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Sunday, 2 February)

Sandro Hawke

• Re: siteData-36: strawman + httpRange-14 [ "Resource-Type:" ] (Thursday, 27 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)

Seairth Jacobs

• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Friday, 14 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Thursday, 13 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Wednesday, 5 February)

Seth Ladd

• Is metadata of a Resource a separate Resource? (Was: [RDFinXHTML-35] Pointers for this issue) (Sunday, 16 February)

Simon St.Laurent

• Re: [xml-dev] The subsetting has begun (Friday, 21 February)

Sjoerd Visscher

• Re: siteData-36: strawman (Friday, 28 February)

Stefan Eissing

• Re: URIEquivalence-15: characters in RFC 2396 (was: Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (..., IRIEverywhere-27, ...)) (Wednesday, 5 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)

Stuart Williams

• Traffic volume on www-tag (was Re: site metadata discussion is overly voluminous) (Thursday, 13 February)

Tim Berners-Lee

• Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML)) (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: xmlFunctions-34 (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: xmlFunctions-34 (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: xmlFunctions-34 (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: xmlFunctions-34 (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: xmlFunctions-34 (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: xmlFunctions-34 (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Saturday, 15 February)
• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Saturday, 15 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) (Saturday, 15 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Proposed issue: site metadata hook (Monday, 10 February)
• Re: [HTTPSubstrate-16] Propoposed criticsm of RFC3205 (Saturday, 8 February)
• [HTTPSubstrate-16] Propoposed criticsm of RFC3205 (Thursday, 6 February)

Tim Bray

• Re: siteData-36: strawman (Friday, 28 February)
• Re: siteData-36: strawman + httpRange-14 [ "Resource-Type:" ] (Thursday, 27 February)
• siteData-36: strawman (Thursday, 27 February)
• OpenURL, still active? (Monday, 24 February)
• Re: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Saturday, 22 February)
• Re: "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Friday, 21 February)
• Posted uri-comp-4 (Friday, 21 February)
• Re: Minimal RDDL [NamespaceDocument-8] (Saturday, 15 February)
• Minimal RDDL [NamespaceDocument-8] (Friday, 14 February)
• site metadata discussion is overly voluminous (Wednesday, 12 February)
• Re: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (Tuesday, 11 February)
• Comments on 6 December webarch Editor's Draft (Wednesday, 5 February)
• Re: [xmlProfiles-29] TAG recommendation for work on subset of XML 1.1 (Wednesday, 5 February)
• "How to Compare URIs" update 3 (Sunday, 2 February)
• Action item in re CP11 (Sunday, 2 February)
• DeepLinking-25: Finding updated (Sunday, 2 February)

Walden Mathews

• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)
• Re: Valid representations, canonical representations, and what the SW needs from the Web... (Monday, 3 February)

Williams, Stuart

• [mixedNamespaceMeaning-13]: TAG resolution to replace with three more focussed issues. (Thursday, 13 February)
• RE: proposed text on IRIEverywhere-27 (Thursday, 6 February)
• RE: URIEquivalence-15: characters in RFC 2396 (was: Re: [Minutes] 27 Jan 2003 TAG teleconf (..., IRIEverywhere-27, ...)) (Tuesday, 4 February)
• RE: proposed text on IRIEverywhere-27 (Tuesday, 4 February)

Yves Lafon

• Re: Site metadata; my preference (Wednesday, 19 February)

Last message date: Friday, 28 February 2003 18:56:33 UTC