- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard.cyganiak@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 12:36:03 +0000
- To: Peter Mika <pmika@yahoo-inc.com>
- Cc: KANZAKI Masahide <mkanzaki@gmail.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
On 2 Dec 2008, at 11:51, Peter Mika wrote: > Personally I don't mind if we choose one or the other, but at this > moment Sindice finds 139,000 documents using > > http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/icaltzd#VEvent > > vs. 25 documents using > > http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal#Vevent > > The results are most likely heavily biased by the fact that Sindice > uses the former to represent microformats (and we've done the same > so far at Yahoo), but this is how much we have in terms of evidence. Oops -- after excluding microformat-producing sites (using Sindice's "- domain:www.xyz.com" syntax), only some 20 documents are left using the icaltzd namespace. So, both namespaces are equally unpopular. Not sure what we should do. Richard > > > Cheers, > Peter > > > KANZAKI Masahide wrote: >> Hi >> >> I've been using RDFcal for five years in my project, and if the name >> space changed this time, it's the second time upset in this short >> period. It's very unfortunate for existing projects to have such an >> unstable namespace as its building block. >> >> If it is inevitable, please make it complete as soon as possible so >> that current project will not waste more resources. If possible, >> unchanged namespace is desirable. >> >> (Actually, I'm writing a book, one chapter of which is devoted to RDF >> calendar. Stable namespace is very important.) >> >> cheers, >> >>
Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2008 13:11:02 UTC