W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2005

fwd: W3C RDF docs admin comments

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:34:34 -0500
To: w3c-semweb-cg@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Cc: danny.ayers@gmail.com
Message-ID: <20050116203434.GC27757@homer.w3.org>

Fwd'ing to SW CG and www-rdf-comments for tracking.

Thanks Danny.


----- Forwarded message from Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> -----

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:24:56 +0100
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Subject: W3C RDF docs admin comments
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd05011612245b70eb10@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Resent-From: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Resent-Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:25:00 +0000

Not sure where this should go - can someone please forward as appropriate.

Couple of things that cropped up while citing W3C RDF resources -
there's (possibly unintentional) inconsistency with links from the
1999 specs, and it isn't clear whether the RDF Validator is current.

There's a copy of the 1999 RDF M&S spec at:
but the URI supplied for latest version:
redirects to the RDF Primer:

The 1999 RDFS spec at:
declares "Newer Version Available", with a link to:
which is the 2004 Recommendation

Elsewhere, the RDF Validator has a note saying it "supports the Last
Call Working Draft specifications" - is it, or is it likely in the
near future to be, sync'ed with the current specs?




----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Sunday, 16 January 2005 20:34:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:05 UTC