- 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