- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:22:19 -0500
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 18:04 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
> In response to a couple comments...
> missing references in appendix
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jul/0037.html
>
> XML 1.1 EBNF normative
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jul/0029.html
>
> I'm doing an audit of the references.
[...]
> When I get a clean run, I intend to check in rq23/Overview.html
> (with fairly detailed change log, of course).
OK... done...
Revision 1.436 2005/07/24 00:15:01 connolly
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#references
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#chlog
I wasn't sure how to resolve these, so I have left them outstanding:
link is neither local, part, informative, nor normative:
[Unicode Security Considerations]
"http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr36/"
link is neither local, part, informative, nor normative:
[This has been noted by RDF-core]
"http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-literalsubjects"
link is neither local, part, informative, nor normative:
[<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#nil>]
"http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_nil"
link is neither local, part, informative, nor normative:
[<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>]
"http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_type"
link is neither local, part, informative, nor normative:
[http://www.w3.org/2004/07/xpath-functions]
"http://www.w3.org/2004/07/xpath-functions"
I don't understand why there are links to rdf-schema.
I wonder if the unicode security considerations reference should
be moved to the protocol. (more on that separately).
The link to #rdfms-literalsubjects uses odd hypertext style. I'm
not sure what to make of it just now.
And I don't quite understand the role of the 07/xpath-functions
namespace. An example would sure help.
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:22:27 UTC