- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:38:22 -0500
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, public-xhtml2@w3.org
Julian Reschke wrote: > Manu Sporny wrote: >> ... >> Please be aware of these initiatives before responding in order to >> contribute to a more productive discussion. >> ... > > I'm aware of these discussions. > > It would be incorrect to assume that this is about a discussion whether > to use CURIEs, or not to, in *general*. > > The introduction of CURIE values for the *new* attributes is a separate > problem. I apologize if I wasn't clear. Since this discussion is spanning a very large number of communities, containing a number of people who probably don't know the background on CURIEs and RDFa, I thought it would be best to point out exactly where some of these discussions have happened. Referencing information sources that would help better educate individuals before joining into the discussion will hopefully keep us away from re-hashing old discussions. Specifically, Henri's comment: "More generally, I think it would make sense to issue an erratum that replaces all CURIEs in RDFa with the corresponding full URIs" ...seemed to imply (NOTE: I'm not saying that this was intentional!) that this had not been discussed previously. Just trying to help educate the large number of people out there that may not be aware of these discussions. If you're already aware of these discussions, feel free to ignore my e-mail. :) -- manu -- Manu Sporny President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Scaling Past 100,000 Concurrent Web Service Requests http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/09/30/scaling-webservices-part-1
Received on Friday, 27 February 2009 15:39:05 UTC