www-tag@w3.org from January 2002 by date

Thursday, 31 January 2002

Re: QUERY Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: QUERY Paul Prescod
Re: [nsMediaType-3] Principles and corner cases Mark Nottingham
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 30 January 2002

Minutes from 28 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference Ian B. Jacobs
Re: QUERY Shakeel Mahate
Re: Issue? Supporting documentation for Issue resolution Tim Bray
QUERY Mark Baker
Re: Issue? Supporting documentation for Issue resolution Tim Berners-Lee
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Tim Berners-Lee

Tuesday, 29 January 2002

Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Paul Prescod
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: [whenToUseGet-7] GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms Mark Nottingham
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should beencouraged...) Paul Prescod
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Dan Connolly
[whenToUseGet-7] GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms Ian B. Jacobs
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Paul Prescod
[rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6] Algorithm for creating a URI from a QName in RDF Model? Ian B. Jacobs
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Gavin Thomas Nicol

Monday, 28 January 2002

Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Paul Prescod
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Paul Prescod
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Shakeel Mahate
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Tim Berners-Lee
RE: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Mike Dierken
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Issue? Supporting documentation for Issue resolution David Orchard
RE: Issue request for the TAG: XForms Williams, Stuart
RE: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Elliotte Rusty Harold
Re: Media types Norman Walsh
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Shakeel Mahate
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Paul Prescod

Sunday, 27 January 2002

RE: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be encouraged...) Martin Duerst

Friday, 25 January 2002

Re: Media types Scott Penrose
Re: Media types Steven Pemberton

Thursday, 24 January 2002

Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should beenco uraged...) Paul Prescod
Re: Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be enco uraged...) Dan Connolly
Background information on GET and XForms (was: GET should be enco uraged...) Micah Dubinko
TAG media type issues and XForms Last Call WD Mark Nottingham
Re: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Paul Prescod
Re[2]: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Chris Lilley
Revised Internet-Draft: Media Feature - xmlns Simon St.Laurent
language bindings for extending functionality cutlass

Wednesday, 23 January 2002

[Minutes] 21 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference Ian B. Jacobs
Re: Internet-Draft: Media Feature - xmlns Simon St.Laurent
Re: Internet-Draft: Media Feature - xmlns Simon St.Laurent
Re: Internet-Draft: Media Feature - xmlns Paul Prescod
Re: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Paul Prescod
RE: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] David E. Cleary
Re: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Paul Prescod
Re: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Chris Lilley
RE: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: I ssue request for the TAG: XForms] Mike Dierken
RE: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] David E. Cleary
Re: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Tim Bray
GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] Dan Connolly

Tuesday, 22 January 2002

Re: RDF Issue #rdfms-qname-uri-mapping Jonathan Borden
Re: RDF Issue #rdfms-qname-uri-mapping Tim Bray

Monday, 21 January 2002

Internet-Draft: Media Feature - xmlns Simon St.Laurent
Re: RDF Issue #rdfms-qname-uri-mapping Jonathan Borden
Re: [nsMediaType-3] Principles and corner cases Tim Bray
[nsMediaType-3] Relationship between media types and namespaces? Ian B. Jacobs
[customMediaType-2] What commonality should there be among W3C media types? Ian B. Jacobs
[w3cMediaType-1] Should W3C WGs define their own media types? Ian B. Jacobs

Friday, 18 January 2002

Re: Issue request for the TAG: XForms Mark Baker
Issue request for the TAG: XForms Barstow Art (NMP/Boston)
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Ian Graham
Re: Media types Roy T. Fielding
Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent
RE: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Larry Masinter
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent
Re: Media types Roy T. Fielding

Thursday, 17 January 2002

Re: Media types Mark Baker

Friday, 18 January 2002

RE: Media types Simon St.Laurent

Thursday, 17 January 2002

Re: Media types Tim Bray
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Joseph Reagle
Re: Media types Keith Moore
RE: Media types Graham Klyne

Friday, 18 January 2002

Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent

Thursday, 17 January 2002

Re: Media types Tim Bray
Re: Media types Roy T. Fielding
Re: Media types Keith Moore

Friday, 18 January 2002

RE: Media types Simon St.Laurent

Thursday, 17 January 2002

RE: Media types Mike Dierken

Friday, 18 January 2002

Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent

Thursday, 17 January 2002

Re: Media types Keith Moore
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Graham Klyne
Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent
Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent
Re: Media types Keith Moore
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Simon St.Laurent
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
RE: Media types Williams, Stuart
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol

Wednesday, 16 January 2002

Re: Media types Norman Walsh
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Joseph Reagle
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Keith Moore
Re: Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Joseph Reagle
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
Re: Media types Edwin Ortega
RE: Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Larry Masinter
IETF XML Mime mailing list archives & XML Protocol working group issues on MIME types Larry Masinter

Tuesday, 15 January 2002

Multiple namespaces Paul Prescod
Re: Media types Paul Prescod
[Minutes] 14 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference Ian B. Jacobs
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
XSLT and namespace dispatch Mark Baker
Re: Media types Paul Prescod
Re: Media types Noah Mendelsohn
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
RE: Media types Mike Dierken
RE: Media types David Orchard
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Tim Bray
RE: Media types Mike Dierken
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Mark Baker
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Paul Prescod
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Joseph Reagle
RE: Media types Noah Mendelsohn
Re: Media types Sean B. Palmer
Re: Media types Mark Baker
RE: Media types Williams, Stuart
Re: Media types Christopher Ferris
Re: Media types Gavin Thomas Nicol
Re: Media types Paul Prescod
Re: Media types Jacek Kopecky
Re: Media types Paul Prescod
Re: Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Mark Baker
Re: Media types Mark Nottingham
Re: Media types Mark Baker

Monday, 14 January 2002

Fwd: Three bits on MediaTypes and IANA Joseph Reagle
Re: A suggestion for TAG output Graham Klyne
A suggestion for TAG output Tim Bray
Re: Media types Tim Bray
Re: Media types Tim Berners-Lee
Re: Media types Jacek Kopecky
Re: Media types Norman Walsh
Comments on the architecture doc Tim Bray

Friday, 11 January 2002

Thursday, 10 January 2002

Comments about http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture#Conten t : proactive distribution Mike Dierken
Comments about http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture#Conten t : is GET the only idempotent method Mike Dierken
Re: [Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference Tim Berners-Lee
RE: Media types Mike Dierken
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Dan Connolly

Wednesday, 9 January 2002

Re: Media types Mark Baker
RE: Media types David Orchard
Re: Media types Mark Baker
Re: Media types Tim Bray
Re: "Homework" (was: [Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference) Roy T. Fielding
Media types Mark Baker
Re: "Homework" (was: [Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference) Mark Baker
RE: Re[2]: Clark's commentary Williams, Stuart
Re: "Homework" (was: [Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference) Graham Klyne
"Homework" (was: [Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference) Graham Klyne

Tuesday, 8 January 2002

RE: Re[2]: Clark's commentary David Orchard
Re[2]: Clark's commentary Chris Lilley
[Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference Ian B. Jacobs
Re[2]: Clark's commentary Chris Lilley

Monday, 7 January 2002

Re: Clark's commentary Tim Bray
Re: Clark's commentary Dan Connolly
Re: Clark's commentary Norman Walsh
Re: Clark's commentary Norman Walsh
Re: Clark's commentary Tim Bray
RE: Clark's commentary Tim Bray
RE: Clark's commentary David Orchard
Re: Clark's commentary Norman Walsh
RE: Clark's commentary David Orchard
Re: Clark's commentary Norman Walsh
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
RE: Re[2]: Is 'testability' a useful architectural constraint? Cohen, Aaron M
Re: Clark's commentary Tim Bray
RE: Re[2]: Is 'testability' a useful architectural constraint? Lee Cole
Re[2]: Is 'testability' a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley
RE: Is 'testability' a useful architectural constraint? Mike Rajkowski
Re: Re[2]: Clark's commentary Norman Walsh
Is 'testability' a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley
Re[2]: Clark's commentary Chris Lilley
Re: Clark's commentary Norman Walsh
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Norman Walsh
Web architecture and specification overlap Graham Klyne

Sunday, 6 January 2002

Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Peter Pappamikail
Re: Resource discovery: limits of URIs Peter Pappamikail

Friday, 4 January 2002

Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Alan Richmond
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Mike Dierken
Re[2]: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley
Re[2]: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley
Re[2]: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley
Re[2]: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Chris Lilley

Thursday, 3 January 2002

RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Cohen, Aaron M
Request for Architects [slightly off topic] Duane Nickull
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Stephen van Egmond
Clark's commentary Stephen van Egmond
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Lee Cole
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Cohen, Aaron M
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Bharat Gogia
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Duane Nickull
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Agnes kielen
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? David Orchard
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Mike Dierken
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Roy T. Fielding
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Scott Penrose
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
Re: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Duane Nickull

Wednesday, 2 January 2002

RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Maarten Stolte
RE: Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Jeff Lowery
Is "simplicity" a useful architectural constraint? Tim Bray

Last message date: Thursday, 31 January 2002 00:02:46 UTC