- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:52:47 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 04/06/13 18:28, Sandro Hawke wrote: > D3. We document this stuff instead in a WG NOTE, and rdf-concepts > mentions it briefly Sandro, I thought this was what the WG was already doing via the note you were developing content for. As I recall (hoped?), it was going to capture the following patterns of usage: 1/ Graph label as proper denoting names (httpRange-14!) 2/ Graph label is taken from the original location (discuss the issue with getting stuff twice; events pattern; relationship to (1)) (other patterns??) and also note: X/ Unspecified labelling and the limitation of publishing. > D5. The WG ignores this stuff, and some rebel band (just me, if > necessary) publishes it as a Semantic Web IG NOTE or a Team > Submission or even some non-W3C document. If the D3 doc outlines the space of issues then the D5 doc can take a strong position (and not be on the WG critical path [*]). Andy [*] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Rdf-extension.html ~ 20 telecons to go, maximum 30 to end of WG including CR and PR time. PR 2013-09-01 => ~12 telecons to go inc. comments handling but that's looking unlikely.
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 07:53:22 UTC