- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 08:31:24 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- cc: webreq <webreq@w3.org>, www-rdf-comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
It wasn't a bug: when RDF M+S became a REC in 1999, the Jan 2000 RDF Schema namespace didn't exist. It is, I agree, a nuisance. One might argue that the older M+S namespace doc at /1999/02/22-etc is a normative part of the W3C REC, and not something to be updated so casually. In practice I suspect you did the sensible thing... Dan On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: > The RDF schema spec, http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-rdf-schema > specifies that the schema namespace is http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema > > However, the RDF 1.0 schema http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns > actually uses the Schema *spec* http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-rdf-schema > as a namespace. This is clearly a bug, and causes schema validations > to fail, apart from being wrong in general. > > I assume that we can fix http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns as a bug > fix, a webmaster editorial fix. > > I have therefore fixed it on the web site. > > Tim Berners-Lee > RDF user and assistant webmaster, w3.org >
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 08:31:26 UTC