Thursday, 28 February 2013
Wednesday, 27 February 2013
- Re: handling rdf:langString according to previous WG discussion and consistently between Concepts and Semantics
- handling rdf:langString according to previous WG discussion and consistently between Concepts and Semantics
- handling rdf:langString according to previous WG discussion and consistently between Concepts and Semantics
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Test submission instructions in implementation report
- my list of changes needed to Semantics and Concepts
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Minutes telecon 2013-02-27 published
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: status of rdf:langString
- Re: Regrets for Next 3 Weeks
- Re: Regrets for Next 3 Weeks
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: status of rdf:langString
- other changes in Semantics
- Re: status of rdf:langString
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- RE: simple literals in concrete RDF syntaxes
- RE: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: RDF errors
- Re: status of rdf:langString
- Re: simple literals in concrete RDF syntaxes
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: change needed in RDF concepts
Tuesday, 26 February 2013
Wednesday, 27 February 2013
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- WG resolutions pointer on Wiki home page
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: proposal to close Issue 109 (ill-typed literals)
- Re: datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- Re: change needed in RDF concepts
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
Tuesday, 26 February 2013
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- proposal to close Issue 109 (ill-typed literals)
- JSON-LD Telecon Minutes for 2013-02-26
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- RDF errors
- datatype maps in Semantics and Concepts
- status of rdf:langString
- change needed in RDF concepts
- simple literals in concrete RDF syntaxes
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Regrets for Next 3 Weeks
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: agenda 27 Feb telecon
- agenda 27 Feb telecon
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Turtle tests blank ID patches, and EARL report for Serd
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Blank Nodes as Graph Identifiers are NOT required for Normalization
- Agenda: JSON-LD Telecon - Tuesday, February 26th 2013
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
Monday, 25 February 2013
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- RE: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- RE: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: status of RDF Concepts and Semantics
Sunday, 24 February 2013
- JSON-LD 1.0 Ready for Last Call
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- status of RDF Concepts and Semantics
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
- Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization
Saturday, 23 February 2013
Friday, 22 February 2013
- Re: RDF-ISSUE-119 (Test-Suite): Spec should reference the test suite [RDF Turtle]
- RDF-ISSUE-119 (Test-Suite): Spec should reference the test suite [RDF Turtle]
Thursday, 21 February 2013
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
Wednesday, 20 February 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- Re: Agenda for 20 Feb 2013
- Minutes of the RDF WG telecon of 2013-02-20
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- new uri schemes for dataset normalization
- RE: Agenda for 20 Feb 2013
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
Tuesday, 19 February 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Agenda for 20 Feb 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Additions to Agenda tomorrow
- Re: Turtle is a W3C Candidate Recommendation (Call for Implementations)
- Re: Additions to Agenda tomorrow
- Additions to Agenda tomorrow
- Re: Turtle is a W3C Candidate Recommendation (Call for Implementations)
- JSON-LD Telecon Minutes for 2013-02-19
- Fwd: Turtle is a W3C Candidate Recommendation (Call for Implementations)
- Turtle CR / editorial
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
Monday, 18 February 2013
- Agenda: JSON-LD Telecon - Tuesday, February 18th 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- RE: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
Sunday, 17 February 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
Saturday, 16 February 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
Friday, 15 February 2013
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Resolution of ISSUE-105
Thursday, 14 February 2013
- Re: ACTIO-229: finding the evidence
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Intent to close ISSUE-204
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: RDF-ISSUE-115: LC Comment: Unsetting @base and @prefix [RDF Turtle]
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: RDF-ISSUE-115: LC Comment: Unsetting @base and @prefix [RDF Turtle]
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: ACTIO-229: finding the evidence
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: ACTIO-229: finding the evidence
- RDF-ISSUE-118 (Simplifying datatypes): Simplifying datatype semantics [RDF Semantics]
- Re: RDF-ISSUE-117 (i18n comments): LC Comments: i18n WG [RDF Turtle]
Wednesday, 13 February 2013
- RDF-ISSUE-117 (i18n comments): LC Comments: i18n WG [RDF Turtle]
- ACTIO-229: finding the evidence
- Turle LC comments
- minutes 13 Feb telecon available
- RDF-ISSUE-116: LC Comment: revised reponse to 'Comments regarding "Turtle and N-Triples Synaxes for RDF" ' [RDF Turtle]
- RDF-ISSUE-115: LC Comment: Unsetting @base and @prefix [RDF Turtle]
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Intent to close ISSUE-213
- Problem with auto-generated fragment IDs for graph names
- Re: Regrets for 13 Feb Telecon
Tuesday, 12 February 2013
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- Re: (very) first draft of semantics available
- (very) first draft of semantics available
- JSON-LD Telecon Minutes for 2013-02-12
- agenda 13 Feb telecon
- Re: Regrets for 13 Feb Telecon
- Re: Regrets for 13 Feb Telecon
- Re: Regrets for 13 Feb Telecon
- Mercurial toxic spill
- Agenda: JSON-LD Telecon - Tuesday, February 12th 2013
Monday, 11 February 2013
- Regrets for 13 Feb Telecon
- regrets Feb 13
- Re: Workgroup Issue Tracking Data in RDF based Linked Data Form
- Re: Workgroup Issue Tracking Data in RDF based Linked Data Form
Saturday, 9 February 2013
Friday, 8 February 2013
- Re: JSON Resource Description ?
- Re: JSON Resource Description ?
- Re: JSON Resource Description ?
- Re: JSON Resource Description ?
- Workgroup Issue Tracking Data in RDF based Linked Data Form
- JSON Resource Description ?
- If the editors use respec…
Thursday, 7 February 2013
Wednesday, 6 February 2013
- Resolution of ISSUE-105
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Draft minutes for 2013-02-06 telecon
- Fwd: RDF Working Group Requests Extension
- Re: Agenda for 6 Feb 2013
- Re: Agenda for 6 Feb 2013
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Agenda for 6 Feb 2013
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
Tuesday, 5 February 2013
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Using bnode identifiers for predicates, graph names
- Re: Agenda for 6 Feb 2013
- JSON-LD Telecon Minutes for 2013-02-05
- Intent to close ISSUE-214
- Intent to close ISSUE-216
Monday, 4 February 2013
- Re: Agenda for 6 Feb 2013
- Agenda: JSON-LD Telecon - Tuesday, February 5th 2013
- Agenda for 6 Feb 2013