- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:05:25 +0100
- To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Cc: "RDFCore Working Group" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Over early uniform normalization, I am opposed to doing anything other than deletion. But ... Maybe I should look over Dave's text and put the anchor back in somewhere else. Since even without Early Uniform Normalization (which is a processing model) we still require that literals and URI refs are normalized (which is a declarative fact). (Rationale for opposition to non-deletion) RDF M&S has these future references on character normalization, and the future is still not arrived. I think DaveB tells me that future promises shouldn't be in specs; I have come round to that point of view. Jeremy > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com] > Sent: 21 November 2002 18:30 > To: Jeremy Carroll; Dave Beckett; Jeremy Carroll; Graham Klyne > Cc: RDFCore Working Group > Subject: RE: concept anchors - RE: Minutes: telecon 2002-11-15 > > > Is there anything one can usefully say about char normalization, > e.g. There > is an issue that should be considered when ... solidifies - and I don't > mean freezes over :) > > Brian > > At 17:57 21/11/2002 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > > > 5.1 Character normalization > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#xtocid48034 > > > >character normalization has gone as promised. > > > >hence this link is conceptually broken. > > > >Any suggestions? > > > >Jeremy > >
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 14:05:41 UTC