- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:52:22 -0500
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Cc: public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 03:36 +0100, Harry Halpin wrote: [...] > 2) So, did we resolve the RDF output format issue - cause it sure sounds > like we did in the spec in favor of RDF/XML. I just did the status blurb, which, I hope, addresses that question: "A number of issues remain to be decided by the working group; this draft takes a position on some of them." -- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec 1.133 So #issue-output-formats remains to be decided by the WG, though the spec does take a position on it. You rightly point out inconsistencies in the position taken... > "a source document, that preserves its meaning in an RDF/XML representation" > > "the source document, that preserves its meaning in an RDF/XML > representation." > > "an RDF/XML rendition" (this one occurs twice) > > In all these cases, just replace "RDF/XML" with "RDF". Yes, I agree. done in 1.134. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 23 October 2006 17:52:37 UTC