- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:02:08 +0000
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
oops - forgot to change subject line. Brian At 13:20 18/02/2003 +0000, Brian McBride wrote: >At 11:04 17/02/2003 -0500, Frank Manola wrote: > >>Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> >>>From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org> >>>Subject: Re: the meaning of RDF tokens >>>Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 10:10:33 -0500 >>>[...] >>> >>>>>Only one last-call comment identifier is needed here, I think. However, I >>>>>do not see any in the last-call comment list at >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues >>>>You won't see it there. There are two sets of change identifiers. The >>>>ones listed at the URL you've cited are issues that have been referred >>>>by the Editors of the relevant documents to the WG for decision. In >>>>addition, each Editor is maintaining an internal set of change >>>>identifiers for those changes they have accepted (as I have this one) >>>>and are going to go ahead and fix. >>>> >>>>--Frank >>>You mean without input from the rest of the working group, or even >>>elevating it to an official comment? >>>I am distinctly unhappy with this way of dealing with my comments. >> >> >>Peter-- >> >>Your original comment was addressed to the Primer, and I've been dealing >>with it on that basis. That didn't make it any less "official", it just >>meant I could decide myself whether I thought I could make the changes >>necessary to the Primer to deal with it. I'll be happy to raise it as a >>general issue to be addressed in all the documents if you like (and in >>fact will do so now). >> >>Brian, can we have an issue number for this please? > >I have recorded comment > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-14 > >The WG will consider this comment and get back to you. > >Brian
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 09:00:59 UTC