- From: Glenn A. Adams <gadams@xfsi.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 23:13:50 -0400
- To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-tt@w3.org>
Dear Chris, I see that I failed to forward the response of the TT WG to your question (below) as follows: <quote> Yes, Dublin Core vocabulary was carefully reviewed for possible use, and the decision of the group was that the intended use was sufficiently different to warrant adoption. This comment was also received during the 1st Last Call, the response to which was recorded at: http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21/DFXPLastCallResponses.html#Issue9. </quote> You may also note the recent thread [1] on this reflector with Al Gilman, who had originally raised the same question during the 1st Last Call of DFXP [2]. I believe that Al has agreed with our final conclusion that: "we found the analogy to SVG so compelling that we based these on that" [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2006Sep/0004.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2005Apr/0038.html If you would, please indicate if these responses represent a satisfactory conclusion to your comment. Regards, Glenn -----Original Message----- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 21:15:20 +0200 Message-ID: <1116992373.20060602211520@w3.org> To: public-tt@w3.org Hello public-tt, 12.1 Element Vocabulary Many (but not all) of the elements seem to have Dublin Core equivalents. Was Dublin Core considered and rejected for this type of metadata? -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Interaction Domain Leader Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Saturday, 16 September 2006 03:14:01 UTC