W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:18:41 -0500
Message-ID: <760bcb2a0902130518o3d975b07h7ba76f2f2ad4d3a6@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Cc: Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>


I care about this too. We've been telling people that *all*
co-representations, even exotic ones like turtle and XRDS, need to
"say the same thing", without providing a piece of writing that
explains why and with what normative force. I'll get it onto the
agenda - or at least into the hopper for any discussion of TAG

I think the procedure is that the topic gets onto a meeting agenda at
the chair's discretion, then at the meeting, after discussion, we
resolve to create an issue.


On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Michael Hausenblas
<michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote:
> TAG members, Ian,
> Honestly, I must admit that I'm a bit disappointed. I *thought* I've clearly
> articulated my question (and I still don't know what is missing from my side
> that I get clear answers - please let me know) and added a request for an
> issue here. In my understanding both were not addressed/answered in a
> satisfying way. I appreciate when a TAG member (thanks, Jonathan, this helps
> me feeling a bit less lost) states [1] :
> 'I'm as starved of citations on this subject as you are.'
> However, I'd really like to hear from a chair or whoever feels responsible
> if or how the TAG intents to address my question/issue.
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 13:19:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:00 UTC