- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:25:55 -0500
- To: Masahide Kanzaki <post@kanzaki.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1098192354.30433.937.camel@dirk>
On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 11:24, Masahide Kanzaki wrote: > 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. Hmm... it seems that I never actually rolled them forward in the 1st place. I proposed the changes 14 Apr 2004 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2004Apr/0022.html but the schema is at revision 1.14 date: 2004/04/07 18:45:16 http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical > >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. > > cheers, -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 2004 13:24:58 UTC