Hello Ed, > Give or take a few quibbles, 303 and rdfs:seeAlso are pretty > much equivalent. Ok... > If such "conformance" is really required > then wouldn't there also be a need for a strong version of > rdfs:seeAlso with similar guarantees? > If such a property hasn't been missed for a while then surely > that's an indication that this conformance rule is not required. I think that there are folk in the community who do indeed want a stronger version of rdfs:seeAlso. No doubt they could craft such a property for use within their own specific domain. However, *if* there are folks in different domains with a broadly similar requirement - it would likely be better to try to address it in a single domain independent way that (with goodwill) could achieve widespread adoption. > > Ed Davies. > Stuart -- Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 EnglandReceived on Monday, 11 February 2008 12:06:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 September 2008 07:02:18 GMT