Re: [Fwd: on HTTP in RDF]

Carlos A Velasco wrote:

> Johannes Koch wrote:
> 
>> Dan Connolly wrote:
>>> Hmm... I also see 
>>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-RFC822-in-RDF-20060216 ;
>>> I don't care for the name/value approach there.
>>
>> Which is what we need for unknown fields. So at least the name/value 
>> part is still needed. I don't think we will need the specific fields 
>> in the current draft of RFC822-in-RDF. I just added them 
>> forcompleteness. Should I delete them?
> 
> I do not see why we shall delete them. I think for the sake of 
> completeness, we shall keep them. Since Dan "does not care", let us 
> leave them.

Dan does not case about the _name/value_ stuff. I don't want to delete 
that. Dan may care about the _specific properties_.
-- 
Johannes Koch - Competence Center BIKA
Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT.LIFE)
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628

Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2006 12:29:35 UTC