- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 08 Mar 2002 00:41:01 -0600
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 2002-03-07 at 20:35, Aaron Swartz wrote: > In <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20020225-f2f/#d-2002-02-25-10>: > > > The WG resolved that RDF uses URI's with fragment ID's to identify resources. > > This issue is now closed. > > I don't recall this being the decision I agreed to. I remember three bullet > points: something about talking to the TAG, putting a "here be dragons" > warning in the appropriate spec, and what is stated above. What happened to > the other resolutions? The TAG bit turned into 2002-02-25#20 DanC Highlight frag id semantics issue with the TAG I'd like to see actions kept near the relevant decisions... but if you're careful, I think you'll find all the essential stuff is in there. Though... hmm... I don't see an action representing the dragons bit. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 8 March 2002 01:41:57 UTC