- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 15:21:13 +0100
- To: "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>, "RDFCore Working Group" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
[[ Discussed in RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax [RDF-CONCEPTS] Section 3 XML Literals and Section 5.1 Character normalization ]] ==> [[ Discussed in RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax [RDF-CONCEPTS] Section 3 XML Literals ]] [[ Discussed in RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax [RDF-CONCEPTS] Section 4.1 Character normalization ]] ==> [[ Discussed in RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax [RDF-CONCEPTS] Section 4.5 Literals ]] Personally, I think it would be tidier to delete the appendices that are going to go; minimally you should strengthen the warning to indicate that it will go. Jeremy > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Beckett [mailto:dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk] > Sent: 22 November 2002 13:08 > To: Jeremy Carroll > Cc: Graham Klyne; RDFCore Working Group > Subject: Re: concept anchors - RE: Minutes: telecon 2002-11-15 > > > >>>Jeremy Carroll said: > > > > > 5.1 Character normalization > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#xtocid48034 > > > > character normalization has gone as promised. > > > > hence this link is conceptually broken. > > Move the anchor to a changes section. > > I see you don't have one, so I'd suggest adding that. > > The link is in my description of the rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces and > rdf-charmod-literals issues at > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#rdf-charmod-literals > > so that would have to be updated. Please suggest what the updated > words should be. > > However, that entire section will go at first REC stage. Or maybe > last call? I've already added a warning at the start of > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Updated-Grammar-changes > > so I can certainly choose to remove it. > > Dave >
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 09:21:29 UTC