- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 08:48:13 -0400
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: shane@aptest.com, W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
On 06/23/2013 07:27 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: > The RDF file that are used internally usually use the 'rec' prefix for this one. > But, well, *shrug*, that is not a strong argument... Why not "tr:" then? Alexandre. > > Ivan > > Shane McCarron wrote: >> In order to enhance the RDFa support in ReSpec, I am going to include an >> indication of the specification status using the vocabulary >> at http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54 - see http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54.n3 >> if you want to view one version. >> >> My plan is to use the prefix 'w3p' for this unless there is an existing commonly >> used prefix for this vocabulary. If anyone has an opinion on this, please don't >> hesitate to chime in. >> >> -- >> Shane P. McCarron >> Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc. >
Received on Sunday, 23 June 2013 12:48:22 UTC