- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:33:41 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Right - but I thought the root RFC would be interesting in light of the discussion. That list can change AT ANY TIME. If we decided to try to make rules that were dependent on knowing that list, a conforming processor would need to read that list from time to time. On 9/30/2010 10:28 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: > Actually, the list of registered URI schemes is at > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html > > Ivan > > On Sep 30, 2010, at 17:19 , Ivan Herman wrote: > >> ... are at: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2010-09-30 >> >> Note that we had two issue resolutions, but several people were missing. I think that we should consider those resolutions accepted and the issues closed unless there is an objection within 48 hours. >> >> There was also a discussion on the literal->uri issue. We agreed we would _not_ close the issue, but the discussion is ongoing... >> >> Ivan >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Thursday, 30 September 2010 15:34:45 UTC