RE: Talked to the xml.gov people from Bullard, Claude L (Len) on 2003-05-27 (www-tag@w3.org from May 2003)

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 09:01:25 -0500
To: "'Paul Prescod'" <paul@prescod.net>, WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE022DC372@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>

Tell them that the IETF, W3C, whoever presents 
options but that only one of the options is not 
shortsighted?

Umm... ok.  

len

From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@prescod.net]

> The folks at xml.gov chose to keep the urn in there for
> a reason.  Anyone know what it was?  If not clear about
> that, why recommend a different solution when the one
> they have is perfectly legitimate even if from one point of
> view, considered shortsighted?  Be clear.

If the solution is shortsighted, what's wrong with telling them?

Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2003 10:01:35 UTC