- From: Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:08:02 +0100
- To: www-tag@w3.org, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
- Cc: Vincent.Quint@inrialpes.fr, djweitzner@w3.org, em@w3.org, steve@w3.org, schreiber@cs.vu.nl, dwood@tucanatech.com, skw@hp.com
[I've removed recipients whom I believe to be on at least one of
the lists.]
The decision tree could be written down like this (if possible,
read using a fixed-pitch font):
Q: Does the W3C consider that, in the absence of CURIEs, there
is a serious gap between requirements and solutions?
Y: Does the W3C consider that CURIEs provide a good solution
to this gap?
Y: Done.
N: Devise a better solution.
N: The W3C and the rest of the World (Wide Web) agree to
differ*.
* At Reuters, we have been using CURIEs, initially without that
name, for two years and eleven months.
At the IPTC, we incorporated CURIEs, initially without that
name, into NewsML 2 nine months ago. We subsequently adopted
the name CURIE, in the light of Mark Birbeck's work.
Misha Wolf
------------------- NewsML 2 resources ------------------------------
http://www.iptc.org/ | http://www.iptc.org/NAR/
http://www.iptc.org/NAR/1.0 | http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsml-2/
To find out more about Reuters visit www.about.reuters.com
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd.
Received on Friday, 21 April 2006 14:08:17 UTC