- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 11:36:29 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 23:16 08/04/2003 +0300, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >gk: > > To kick things off, I'll make a strawman proposal: > > [[ > > It is proposed that the RDF namespace URIs remain the same as those in > > previous versions of RDF, and that the text cited above is removed from > RDF > > Concepts. > > > Rationale: we have been using the same namespace URIs for some time now > > with the "new RDF", and there has been little indication from the > > user/developer community that this causes any great problems. > > ]] > >Second - or alternatively lets just take editorial perogative and make the >change. That was a note to LC reviewers, the LC review period is over, the >note is past its sell-by-date. Its not quite that simple. We have a last call comment http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0490.html which hasn't made it to the issues list yet, so I've added it: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#efth-01 If someone were to propose a resolution this week, perhaps along the lines of: [[ Considering that: o the WG, have in multiple editions of WD's indicated its intention to not to change the URI REFS for the RDF and RDFS namespaces o the WG explicitly requested feedback on this intention o very little negative feedback has been received o there is significant cost and complexity in changing the namespace URI REFs the RDFCore WG resolves o not to change the URI REFS for the RDF and RDFS namespaces o to ACTION the document editor's to make such editorial changes as are required by this decision ]] Brian
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2003 06:35:31 UTC