- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:11:29 +0100 (BST)
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Hi Dave > > I am writing the response to Nick Efthymiou re > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#efth-01 > and I believe you should have deleted this text: > [[ > Note (Informative): The Working Group invites feedback from the community on > the effects of the removals and additions of these terms on existing > implementations and documents and on the costs and benefits of adopting a new > namespace URI to reflect this change (currently not proposed by the Working > Group). > ]] > > in light of > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0207 > RESOLVED: > not to change the URI REFS for the RDF and RDFS namespaces > ACTION: daveb editorial changes reflecting not changing namespace URI Sigh. Another action I missed. I've updated the draft editor's draft (sic) to remove the two informational notes that mentioned this. One was in the 5.1 namespace section, the other near where aboutEach* is mentioned in 7.2.5. Changes to CVS 1.502 at http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/ So apart from those two deletions, the 26 June draft of http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030117/ remains the latest for review. Dave
Received on Friday, 4 July 2003 03:13:52 UTC