- From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:44:34 +0100
- To: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>
Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich wrote: > Hi > > +1 for the resolution and also a question: Why don't we allow both FOAF > and DC? I guess we could but we'd need the schema to allow either and the XSLT to handle either... and it just seems to be simpler and therefore less error-prone to choose one or the other. Phil. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-powderwg-request@w3.org >> [mailto:public-powderwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Phil Archer >> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 3:01 PM >> To: Public POWDER >> Subject: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: use dcterms for the maker >> element and rename to creator >> >> >> Following my exchange with Dan Bri just now [1], I'd like to >> propose that we change the name of the POWDER <maker> element >> to <creator> and change the transform so that this becomes >> <dcterms:creator>. >> >> Note that the legacy (and commonly seen) dc:creator just >> takes a string whereas dcterms:creator has the range of dcterms:Agent. >> >> This does not prevent using FOAF terms within a dcterms:Agent >> class (which is good because FOAF has some very useful terms >> already) but it does eliminate POWDER's formal dependence on FOAF. >> >> We can consider the resolution properly next week at the f2f >> but if there are any comments ahead of that, please speak up. >> >> Thanks >> >> Phil. >> >> >> [1] >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Jul/0028.html >> onwards >>
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2008 13:45:13 UTC