On 04/09/2011 08:39 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > Additionally we would find the following to be "sufficiently novel": > multiple first hand statements from people who are implementing distinct > large scale RDFa consuming tools on how they would prefer to proceed. While I have previously made the point that rehashing, re-questioning, re-clarifying, etc. "old information" is now off topic for this mailing list; I want to now make it clear that any and all discussion (additional supporting evidence, rebuttals, requests for clarification, etc) relating to "new information" are welcome here. I furthermore wish to actively encouraged people aware of such new information to post it here in order to enable everybody to fully participate in the discussion. At the present time, I am aware of the following: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20110411#l-573 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011Apr/0062.html - Sam RubyReceived on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 12:32:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:12 UTC