- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 17:44:02 +0000
- To: fmanola@mitre.org
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 12:21 28/10/2002 -0500, Frank Manola wrote: >I still like my formulation: So do I, its pretty close to my suggestion. The difficulty I have is that the sentence in the primer does not make it clear whether it's the RDF information thats in the web or the resources that the information is about or both. I was trying to get rid of that ambiguity. As for dropping World Wide - I don't care much - I just prefer fewer words where they will do the same job. [...] >b. I'm not sure leaving "about resources" out doesn't change the >meaning slightly. Anyway, if we say "for representing information in >the Web", what about those people who use RDF for representing >information elsewhere (e.g., in files)? Seth suggested something similar on rdf comments. We are a W3C working group. We propose recommendations for the web. If folks want to use them elsewhere, that's great. But I suggest we don't want ietf breathing down our necks saying "Ah, so you are defining recommendations for the internet are you! Let me tell you about the process for defining internet standards ..." micro-editing again Brian
Received on Monday, 28 October 2002 12:41:33 UTC