- From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:04:21 -0400
- To: <david.wood@talis.com>
- CC: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
From: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com> Subject: [ALL] FTF1 Minutes Update Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:38:12 -0500 > Hi all, > > Minutes for the FTF1 were not accepted on today's call due to two > separate email threads that resulted in -1 votes on the mailing list > after the meeting. I took an action to add notes into the minutes to > point to those threads. > > 1) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0366.html > > This comment was added to 13 April's minutes: > [[ > See post-FTF1 email discussion regarding this resolution at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0366.html > ]] > > 2) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html > > Nathan commented on a proposal which was not adopted, so I did not > change the minutes. > > My understanding is that the minutes now reflect both the meeting and > the post-meeting comments. > > Regards, > Dave Hmm. The emails that I was thinking of are http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0307.html from Antoine Zimmermann, and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0309.html from Lee Feigenbaum both of which have -1 on PROPOSED: Mark xs:string as archaic for use in RDF, recommending use of plain literals instead. Recommend that systems silently convert xs:string data to plain literals. In subsequence email, I tried to point out that there is an invalid assumption in the thread. Nonetheless, the discussion should probably be noted in the F2F minutes, which I have done. peter
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 17:05:27 UTC