- From: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 13:54:51 +0200
- To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 13:40, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> as an input to our call, here are the opinions about the ITS RDF
> representation question gathered so far. NOTE: I didn't asked for types
> of votes (pro, can live with, cannot live with, ...). So below is my
> interpretation of mails. Let's confirm this on the call. If the
> attendance on the call is low (thank you August holidays :) ) we may
> need to take a few more days via mail to gather additional votes.
>
> Talk to you soon,
>
> Felix
>
> 1) Have a non-normative reference to NIF
> Pro: Dave, Felix, Tadej, Karl
I can't attend today telcon, but I'm in favour of this option as well.
Jirka
> Can live with: David, Jörg
> Cannot live with this: -
>
> 2a) Intent to have a standardized, that is normative RDF representation
> of ITS2. This could then not be NIF. It could be 2a) something based on
> NIF, e.g. moving the six URIs that we rely on (+ the ontology file?)
> Pro: David, Jörg
> Can live with this: -
> Cannot live with this: Dave, Felix, Tadej
>
> 2b) something completely different, yet to be defined.
> Pro: -
> Can live with this: Jörg
> Cannot live with this: Felix, Dave, David
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
Professional XML consulting and training services
DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member
------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 14 August 2013 11:55:15 UTC