- From: <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:12:11 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Masahide Kanzaki" <post@kanzaki.com>
- Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
> > At 10:35 AM -0500 04.10.14, Dan Connolly wrote: >>I wonder if I should roll back the timezone changes >>and start a new schema with the new timezone design. >> >>I'm not inclined to maintain 2 schemas. I'm willing to >>move new development to schema with a URI different >>from http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical but I'm not >>offering to do maintenance on that one as well as >>new development. > > Yes, yes. It's very welcome to roll back the changes in the schema of > current URI, as well as to discuss and develop modified schema with a new > namespace URI. > >>The tests and conversion tools will migrate to the >>new schema, I think; I don't think I can afford to >>keep 2 sets of them around. > > That's fine. Keep existing data as is, and move forward. +1 on rollback TZ design, and on exploring new options at a new namespace uri I'm agnostic on whether new namespace would just be an alternate TZ design or would have the rest of ical as well... Dan
Received on Friday, 15 October 2004 03:12:12 UTC