- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@miscoranda.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:18:09 +0000
- To: "Jonathan Rees" <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote: > I'm happy to do what I can to coordinate the effort and drive it > to a speedy conclusion. If you want to raise it under the aegis of the TAG, perhaps attaching it to a specific issue or creating a new issue for it would be the best approach? (You probably know better than I do on that front, though.) I'm not sure that Resource-Description and so on are a good idea if they subvert the 200 OK httpRange-14 semantics, but bringing back Link seems okay. Mark Nottingham is working on that—I suggest bugging him until he tells you how his internet drafts on the subject are coming along! This issue only affects people who use RDF, and since I'm not a user of RDF at the moment I don't really have any personal motivation for solving the situation, which is why I didn't weigh in to the thread until your ping today. I see from http://esw.w3.org/topic/FindingResourceDescriptions that you've taken up an informal action to collect use cases for this. I think that would be a very good idea before going forward, even before "rousing the rabble". You can make your workflow a lot more efficient if you collect and then, especially, prioritise Semantic Web use cases. This particular issue might turn out to be very low on the list. Thanks, -- Sean B. Palmer, http://inamidst.com/sbp/
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 21:18:57 UTC