Re: flag or redirect the old RECs ?

On 03/26/2013 08:37 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> On 03/25/2013 03:17 AM, Polleres, Axel wrote:
>> Same here... +1
>
> Okay, I'm hearing consensus on this, so I'll go ahead with it.

Done.  See:

    http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
    http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/

You may need to shift-reload since these have a long cache time.

        -- Sandro


>
>
>> Axel
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Birte Glimm [mailto:birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de]
>>> Sent: Sonntag, 24. März 2013 12:18
>>> To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
>>> Subject: Re: flag or redirect the old RECs ?
>>>
>>> +1 to the yellow box.
>>>
>>> Birte
>>>
>>> On 21 March 2013 15:36, Andy Seaborne 
>>> <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 21/03/13 13:35, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 21, 2013 9:28 AM, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org
>>>>> <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> wrote:
>>>>>   >
>>>>>   > Take a look at this:
>>>>>   >
>>>>>   >> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
>>>>>   >>
>>>>>   > Notice the yellow box?   Should we do that for
>>>>>   >>
>>>>>   >> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should do this for the query specification in particular.
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Redirection would be OK but leaving it in place with an additional
>>>> yellow box linking to the new query document is my preference.
>>>>
>>>>          Andy
>>>>
>>>>> - Chime
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Jun. Prof. Dr. Birte Glimm            Tel.:    +49 731 50 24125
>>> Inst. of Artificial Intelligence         Secr:  +49 731 50 24258
>>> University of Ulm                         Fax:   +49 731 50 24188
>>> D-89069 Ulm birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de
>>> Germany
>
>
>