- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:10:30 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Cc: public-glossary@w3.org, csdee@cs.ust.hk
Le mardi 23 janvier 2007 à 16:54 +0000, Dan Brickley a écrit : > Can you add a (more prominent) link back to the top of the Glossary site? Err... Doesn't the logo at the top of the page work? Anyway, I've added a link "W3C Glossaries" under the <h1> of the results pages. > BTW is there still a SKOS version? Yes; the RDF files are available at: http://www.w3.org/2003/03/glossary-project/data/glossaries/ > How do you deal with the hypertext > fragments? Using rdf:parseType="Literal". > And did you see > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Dec/0036.html Nope, I hadn't; I'm not sure I'll have time to reply to that survey in any reasonable time, but feel free to notice the relevant persons that the W3C Glossary is relying on SKOS (or at least some version of it - I haven't followed the possible recent evolutions of the vocabulary). > Does http://www.w3.org/2003/03/glossary-project/analysis still describe > the workings of the system reasonably well? Yes, I think it does. > The note in > http://www.w3.org/QA/2003/01/Glossary says > """it's now using the SKOS Schema produced by the SWAD-EU activity as > much as possible, instead of the custom schema it was using until now.""" > > Now would probably be a good time to revisit any issues with SKOS that > you had... (apologies if I've missed a mail thread on that) I don't think that beyond the hypertext fragment thingy we noticed any real problem with SKOS... HTH, Dom
Received on Tuesday, 23 January 2007 20:11:20 UTC