- From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 09:39:24 +0000
- To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetilk@opera.com>
- CC: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>, public-xg-wcl@w3.org, Dan Brickley <danbrickley@gmail.com>, Cedric Kiss <cedric@w3.org>
Hi Kejtil, Sorry for a slow response. Until and if we have a full charter, it's hard to respond to this properly, but basically, yes, 'we' should certainly make our voice heard in this discussion. I guess you'll be active in this space anyway so I'm hoping you can carry the torch? The FOAF 'unstable' classes I think we most need are: Maker, Agent and Organisation. Phil. P.S. No, tracker isn't open to the world - and the WCL-XG's charter runs out any day now. For the sake of what may be a few more days, let's hold off and see if we can set things up properly under the new system. Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote: > On Monday 29 January 2007 12:55, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: >> Anyway, as to the discussion on using FOAF, we've had a similar >> debate in ERT WG. > > Danbri has just reopened the FOAF mailing list: > http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev > Perhaps "we" should start a thread there? > > BTW, is the issue tracker open to the world? > > Cheers, > > Kjetil
Received on Tuesday, 6 February 2007 09:39:45 UTC