- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 17:28:47 +0100
- To: "Brian McBride <bwm" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: brian_mcbride@hp.com, Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
no objection Brian
-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Brian McBride
<bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.co To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>,
m> <brian_mcbride@hp.com>
Sent by: cc:
w3c-rdfcore-wg-requ Subject: Re: XMLLiteral belongs in RDF namespace, not RDFs
est@w3.org
2002-11-09 04:32 PM
At 13:21 08/11/2002 -0500, Dan Brickley wrote:
>Do let me know when this is figured out one way or the other, and I'll
>update the in-progress RDFS WD-draft accordingly. Brian, can you advise?
I don't remember what we agreed. I'd don't like having Rdf depend on
something inthe RDFS namespace either.
Does anyone have any objections to putting this in the RDF namespace. We
already have new names in there to cope with collections.
Brian
>Dan
>
>On 8 Nov 2002, Dan Connolly wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, 2002-11-08 at 11:53, Dave Beckett wrote:
> > > >>>Dan Connolly said:
> > > >
> > > > I see
> > > > rdfs:XMLLiteral
> > > >
> > > > in
> > > >
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes/RDF%20Model%20Theory_Oct_draft.html
> > > >
> > > > That should be rdf:XMLLiteral, right Dave?
> > >
> > > No, we agreed rdfs:XMLLiteral
> >
> > I'm fairly certain I agreed to no such thing.
> > Pointer to record, please?
> >
> >
> >
Received on Saturday, 9 November 2002 11:29:31 UTC