Re: wdrs:describedby

On 11/5/10 1:41 PM, Phil Archer wrote:
> The 303 debate has prompted me to re-look at the definition of 
> wdrs:describedby - and it's obvious that the POWDER WG (which I 
> chaired), made an error.
>
> I've begun the process of seeking to change the spec so that the range 
> restriction on this property will be removed [1]. Therefore, 
> wdrs:describedby, like the @rel link, will be able to point to any 
> kind of descriptive resource and will not imply that the description 
> is provided in POWDER.
>
> I hope, therefore, that there will be no need to define a new property 
> of isDefinedBy.
>
> Cheers
>
> Phil.
>
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2010Nov/0002.html
>

Hopefully not :-)

All the gaps are being plugged, our general narrative is getting clear 
by the second, re. Linked Data, Methinks!

Dogfooding is a great thing re. tech QA.

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen