- From: Bill de hÓra <bdehora@interx.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:21:47 +0100
- To: "Rdfcore \(E-mail\)" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Glad we're publishing, but...I'd appreciate a show of hands... 6.32 parseLiteral " rdf:parseType=\"Literal\"" 6.33 parseResource " rdf:parseType=\"Resource\"" What would be the chances of: 1: changing them to this: 6.32 parseLiteral " rdf:parseType=\"rdf:Literal\"" 6.33 parseResource " rdf:parseType=\"rdf:Resource\"" 2: doing a soft deprecation on the existing attribute values. 3: reserving the prefix 'rdf:' for future RDF rec use in recognition of parseType's known use as an extension mechanism plus there are words in the existing M&S that seem to mandate this type of upgrade. My apologies for not raising this at the telcon, but I've been misreading the attributes as having the prefix in there, until about 5 minutes before the telcon ended, and I didn't want to cut into the MT discussion. Bill -- Bill de hÓra InterX bdehora@interx.com +44(0)20-8817-4039 www.interx.com
Received on Friday, 31 August 2001 11:22:28 UTC