- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:08:48 +0100
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- CC: danbri@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > >>10: Denotation of rdf:XMLLiteral >> [[ >> PROPOSE: accept the definition of rdf:XMLLiteral value >>space from >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0452 >> >> and action concepts editors to integrate it in the >>editors draft, using >> editorial discretion. >> ]] >> > > I don't understand this proposal, since the WG has already > discussed the definition in > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0452 > > during last telecon, identified problems with it, and tasked > Jeremy to write up a revised version. > > The issues identified during the last telecon are not IMO editorial > issues. > Sorry - we seem to be at cross-purposes - are you happy with: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0185 which is a minor edit of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0153 about which you said: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0160 "I'm satisfied with this definition." If that's OK let's change to that message being the one quoted in the proposal. I don't think we should get into an argument about how big a difference is editorial! vis - [[ PROPOSE: accept the definition of rdf:XMLLiteral from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Aug/0185 and action concepts editors to integrate it in the editors draft, using editorial discretion. ]] Obviously, if you at any stage think I have overreached editorial discretion then I would welcome correction. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 15 August 2003 07:11:23 UTC