Review of XHTML+RDFa 1.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-xhtml-rdfa-20100803/) (Knud)
API question
API typos
Fwd: Re: RDFa API - graph?
RDFa API - graph?
Review of XHTML+RDFa 1.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-xhtml-rdfa-20100803/) (Tom)
RDFa WG telecon minutes for 2010-10-28
[Fwd: ACTION-487 Assess potential impact of IRI draft on RDF/XML, OWL, and Turtle]
- Re: [Fwd: ACTION-487 Assess potential impact of IRI draft on RDF/XML, OWL, and Turtle]
- Re: [Fwd: ACTION-487 Assess potential impact of IRI draft on RDF/XML, OWL, and Turtle]
RDFa API new Issues - summary
ISSUE-59: DataQuery [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
- Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-57: TypedLiteralConverter Failures and Exceptions
ISSUE-56: Relative URI resolution [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-55: Specifying that implementations must implement TypedLiteralConverters for all xsd numerical types [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-54: DataSerializer [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-53: DataParser Upgrades [RDFa 1.1 API]
Fwd: Beware of W3C Accounting Phishing
ISSUE-52: Lightweight DataStore aligned with ECMAScript [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-51: Clean up create*** methods for RDF interfaces and move to DataContext [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-50: TypedLiteralConverter modifier parameter [RDFa 1.1 API]
ISSUE-49: RDFNode type, equality and canonicalization [RDFa 1.1 API]
default prefix versus no prefix
new version of WebIDL
Volunteers needed to review XHTML+RDFa 1.1
Telecon Agenda - October 28th 2010, 1400 UTC
Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
- Re: Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
- Re: Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
- Re: Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
- Re: Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
- Re: Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
- Re: Some RDFa 1.1 Core edge cases that we need to clarify
parse() and media types
XMLLiterals and Exclusive XML Canonicalization
- Re: XMLLiterals and Exclusive XML Canonicalization
- Re: XMLLiterals and Exclusive XML Canonicalization
ISSUE-17 comment submitted to the PFWG
RDFa Talk at WebDirections South 2010
RDFa WG telecon minutes for 2010-10-21
RDFa Core Last Call telecon notes
Profiles in RDFa 1.1
Tightening up the spec on what exactly an RDFa profile is
- Re: Tightening up the spec on what exactly an RDFa profile is
- Re: Tightening up the spec on what exactly an RDFa profile is
ISSUE-48: @prefix missing from attribute list
Updated RDFa Core Editor's Draft
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-47: case-sensitivity for terms
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
- Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-16: RDF Collections
PROPOSAL #2 to close ISSUE-39: rdfa term mapping triples
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-46: conversion of plain literals to IRIs
Telecon Agenda - October 21st 2010, 1400 UTC
ISSUE-47 (case-sensitivity for terms): How should case-sensitivity be handled for terms specified via RDFa Profile documents? [RDFa 1.1 Core]
Quick feedback on missing functionality requested (RDFa API)
Layers of RDF API
Telecon Agenda - October 14th 2010, 1400 UTC
- Re: Telecon Agenda - October 14th 2010, 1400 UTC
- Re: Telecon Agenda - October 14th 2010, 1400 UTC
- RE: Telecon Agenda - October 14th 2010, 1400 UTC
- Re: Telecon Agenda - October 14th 2010, 1400 UTC
RDFa API - Collections / List
Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
- Re: Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
- Re: Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
- Re: Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
- Re: Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
- Re: Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
- Re: Need volunteer reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 (pre-Last Call)
prefix case-insensitivity
RDFa API object equality and canonicalization of RDF Nodes
Term case-sensitivity
Re: HTML WG: ISSUE-120 Use of prefixes is too complicated for a Web technology
HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
- Re: HTML5 Polyglot spec and RDFa
RDFa WG telecon minutes for 2010-10-07
RDFa Core, section 4.2
RDFa API comments from TimBL
- Re: RDFa API comments from TimBL
- Re: RDFa API comments from TimBL
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
- Re: RDFa API - adding Namespace
Telecon Agenda - October 7th 2010, 1400 UTC
Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
- Re: Very early alpha state pure JavaScript implementation of the RDFa API draft spec released
Why RDFa profiles should be expressed in RDF
ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
- Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
- Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
- Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
- Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
- Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
- Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-45: cite and longdesc support
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-17: @role integration
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: is _ a special prefix? or a URI?
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: is _ a special prefix? or a URI?
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: is _ a special prefix? or a URI?
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: is _ a special prefix? or a URI?
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-41: processor graph vocabulary
PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-39: RDFa term mapping triples
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-39: RDFa term mapping triples
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-39: RDFa term mapping triples
- Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-39: RDFa term mapping triples
Re: Ongoing objection to RDFa Profiles format (as XHTML+RDFa)
- Re: Ongoing objection to RDFa Profiles format (as XHTML+RDFa)
- Re: Ongoing objection to RDFa Profiles format (as XHTML+RDFa)
- Re: Ongoing objection to RDFa Profiles format (as XHTML+RDFa)
- Re: Ongoing objection to RDFa Profiles format (as XHTML+RDFa)
- Re: Ongoing objection to RDFa Profiles format (as XHTML+RDFa)