- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 04:07:31 +0200
- To: Story Henry <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Henry, I'm pretty sure you'll have all workings on this - all that's needed is a flattened model. I bet it would only take a couple of weeks (months) to prepare that in a form that the W3C would accept as a Note or something. If you can pull together some of your old stuff, I'm happy to draft some text. It needs doing soon because of the initiatives that hang off Atom are getting interesting. Need to be in there from the get-go. On 3 April 2010 03:56, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> wrote: > About time to do another rev of that thing? The social xg is having > another spin, might be a good time to throw it there. > > I suspect most folks (yourself there mostly Henry) think this time > around it should be done minimally..? > > On 3 April 2010 01:29, Story Henry <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote: >> On 2 Apr 2010, at 23:53, Nathan wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Any guidance on using predicates in linked data / rdf which do not come >>> from rdfs/owl. Specifically I'm considering the range of: >>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/* >> >> Ah is that something you found in the AtomOWL spec? >> >> Perhaps we should just give them other names, until the IETF places RDF representations >> at those locations, which I imagine could take forever. >> >> Henry >> >>> >>> such as edit, self, related etc - with additional consideration to the >>> thought that these will end up in rdf via RDFa/grddl etc v soon if not >>> already. >>> >>> Any guidance? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Nathan >>> >> >> >> > > > > -- > http://danny.ayers.name > -- http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Saturday, 3 April 2010 02:08:04 UTC