www-tag@w3.org from February 2009 by date

Saturday, 28 February 2009

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Rob Sayre
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Rob Sayre
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Sam Ruby
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Rob Sayre
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Maciej Stachowiak
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Sam Ruby
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Manu Sporny
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Karl Dubost
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: Server and client burden for URIQA vs. Link: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Roy T. Fielding
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Sam Ruby

Friday, 27 February 2009

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Mark Nottingham
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Mark Nottingham
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Dan Brickley
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Robert J Burns
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Server and client burden for URIQA vs. Link: Richard Cyganiak
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida
• Re: Server and client burden for URIQA vs. Link: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Henri Sivonen
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Manu Sporny
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Manu Sporny
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Julian Reschke
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Steven Pemberton
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Shane McCarron
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Henri Sivonen
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Karl Dubost
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Henri Sivonen
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Henri Sivonen
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Karl Dubost
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Mark Nottingham
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Julian Reschke
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Phil Archer
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Mark Nottingham
• Re: [Fwd: Using XMLNS in link/@rel] Steven Pemberton
• Re: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke
• Re: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Shane McCarron
• Using XMLNS in link/@rel Mark Nottingham
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com

Thursday, 26 February 2009

• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Pat Hayes
• Re: Agenda for TAG Face-to-Face Meeting, 3-5 March 2009 (Redwood Shores, CA) noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Server and client burden for URIQA vs. Link: Richard Cyganiak
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Server and client burden for URIQA vs. Link: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Agenda for TAG Face-to-Face Meeting, 3-5 March 2009 (Redwood Shores, CA) Jonathan Rees
• Re: FYI: Link -04 Mark Nottingham

Wednesday, 25 February 2009

• Re: Fwd: FYI: Link -04 Dan Connolly
• Re: Fwd: FYI: Link -04 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Fwd: FYI: Link -04 Mark Nottingham
• Re: Agenda for TAG Face-to-Face Meeting, 3-5 March 2009 (Redwood Shores, CA) noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: What resource does this URL identify? - http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11f804dfae358bd9 Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)
• Server and client burden for URIQA vs. Link: Jonathan Rees
• Re: Agenda for TAG Face-to-Face Meeting, 3-5 March 2009 (Redwood Shores, CA) Jonathan Rees
• Agenda for TAG Face-to-Face Meeting, 3-5 March 2009 (Redwood Shores, CA) noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang
• RE: What resource does this URL identify? - http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11f804dfae358bd9 Martin Nally
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Phil Archer
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• RE: What resource does this URL identify? - http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11f804dfae358bd9 Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Phil Archer
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Stuart Williams comments in TAG ISSUE-57 (httpRedirections-57) noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Xiaoshu Wang

Tuesday, 24 February 2009

• Re: "Content-Type Processing Model" draft 9 Jan (ISSUE-24 contentTypeOverride-24) noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Metadata survey Phil Archer
• Re: Draft Minutes of the TAG Teleconference of 19 February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: "Content-Type Processing Model" draft 9 Jan (ISSUE-24 contentTypeOverride-24) Dan Connolly
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Dan Connolly
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Cullen Jennings
• RE: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Larry Masinter
• "Content-Type Processing Model" draft 9 Jan (ISSUE-24 contentTypeOverride-24) Dan Connolly
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Cullen Jennings
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Julian Reschke
• RE: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Metadata survey Jonathan Rees
• RE: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Tim Berners-Lee
• RE: Using Content Negotiation to relate "data resources" to AJAX user interfaces Martin Nally
• What resource does this URL identify? - http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11f804dfae358bd9 Martin Nally
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Julian Reschke
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
• RE: Using Content Negotiation to relate "data resources" to AJAX user interfaces Sebastien Lambla
• content negotiation in HTTP Larry Masinter

Monday, 23 February 2009

• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Thomas Roessler
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Cullen Jennings
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Thomas Roessler
• Draft Minutes of the TAG Teleconference of 19 February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Dan Connolly
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Cullen Jennings
• http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49) Dan Connolly
• No TAG Teleconference on 26 February 2009 -- suggestions for F2F preparation noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Friday, 20 February 2009

• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Dan Brickley
• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Xiaoshu Wang
• Using Content Negotiation to relate "data resources" to AJAX user interfaces Martin Nally
• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Dan Brickley
• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Xiaoshu Wang

Wednesday, 18 February 2009

• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Martin Nally

Friday, 20 February 2009

• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Jonathan Rees

Thursday, 19 February 2009

• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Pat Hayes
• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Michael Hausenblas
• Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Dan Connolly
• RE: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Larry Masinter
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Pat Hayes
• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Richard Cyganiak
• Re: Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Jonathan Rees
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document John Kemp
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data' Michael Hausenblas
• Re: HTML and XML Henri Sivonen
• Re: HTML and XML noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Wednesday, 18 February 2009

• Re: google, Microsoft, Yahoo support rel="canonical" Dan Connolly
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Toby A Inkster
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data ashok malhotra
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data ashok malhotra
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Jonathan Rees
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Jonathan Rees
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Jonathan Rees
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document David Orchard
• Re: google supports on rel="canonical" ISSUE-27 rel-ownership Phil Archer
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document John Kemp
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data ashok malhotra
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Jonathan Rees
• Approved minutes of TAG Teleconference of 5 February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Approved minutes of TAG Teleconference of 22 January 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: TAG review of EXI Best Practices noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Tuesday, 17 February 2009

• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Agenda for TAG Teleconference of 19 February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Agenda for TAG Teleconference of 19 February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document John Kemp
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: google supports on rel="canonical" ISSUE-27 rel-ownership Shane McCarron
• google supports on rel="canonical" ISSUE-27 rel-ownership Dan Connolly
• Re: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document David Orchard
• RE: Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document Larry Masinter
• Re: HTML and XML Anne van Kesteren
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Paul Prescod
• ISSUE-50: Please provide a status update on the URNS & Registries Issue noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document John Kemp
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia

Monday, 16 February 2009

• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Pat Hayes
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: Palm webOS approach to HTML extensibility: x-mojo-* [issue-51 selfDescribingWeb-51] Paul Prescod
• Palm webOS approach to HTML extensibility: x-mojo-* [issue-51 selfDescribingWeb-51] Dan Connolly
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: HTML and XML Jeff Sonstein
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia

Sunday, 15 February 2009

• Re: HTML and XML Jeff Sonstein
• Re: HTML and XML Bijan Parsia
• Re: a little help with my trip to the March TAG meeting? Jonathan Rees

Friday, 13 February 2009

• Re: HTML and XML Ian Hickson
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• TAG minutes 12 Feb for review: March meeting planning, metadata, WS-RA, link maintenance Dan Connolly
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Jonathan Rees
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Ian Davis
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Ian Davis
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Ian Davis
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• FW: I-D Action:draft-hammer-discovery-02.txt Eran Hammer-Lahav

Thursday, 12 February 2009

• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Dan Connolly
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
• RE: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Larry Masinter
• a little help with my trip to the March TAG meeting? Dan Connolly
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Dan Brickley
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: HTML and XML Geoffrey Sneddon
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Mark Baker
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Julian Reschke
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Thomas Roessler
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Julian Reschke
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations John Kemp
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Dan Connolly
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Jonathan Rees
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Xiaoshu Wang
• Re: W3C TAG Finding "The Self-Describing Web" has been published Dan Brickley
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• RE: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Dan Brickley
• Question on the boundaries of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data Michael Hausenblas
• RE: URN duri and tdb spec updated Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Julian Reschke
• Re: broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Story Henry
• Re: HTML and XML Michael(tm) Smith
• Re: HTML and XML Robert J Burns
• broken links in W3C documents and recommendations Larry Masinter

Wednesday, 11 February 2009

• Re: HTML and XML Ian Hickson
• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Roy T. Fielding
• Re: HTML and XML T.V Raman
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Geoffrey Sneddon
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Geoffrey Sneddon
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Harold
• Re: HTML and XML Paul Libbrecht
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Anne van Kesteren
• Re: HTML and XML Anne van Kesteren
• Re: HTML and XML Henry S. Thompson
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Henri Sivonen
• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Henri Sivonen
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Julian Reschke
• Re: HTML and XML Michael(tm) Smith
• Re: HTML and XML Elliotte Rusty Harold

Tuesday, 10 February 2009

• Re: HTML and XML Michael(tm) Smith
• Re: HTML and XML Jeff Sonstein
• Agenda for TAG Teleconference of 12 February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: HTML and XML Henry S. Thompson
• Re: HTML and XML Henry S. Thompson
• Re: FYI: broken links in TAG finding uriMediaType-9 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: FYI: broken links in TAG finding uriMediaType-9 John Kemp
• Category errors Jonathan Rees
• Draft of minutes from 5 February 2009 TAG telecon for review Jonathan Rees
• Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-site-meta-01 Mark Nottingham

Monday, 9 February 2009

• Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case. Jonathan Rees
• TAG ISSUE-20: Error handling noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Mild tweaks to 'http' scheme description for HTTPbis Jonathan Rees

Sunday, 8 February 2009

• W3C TAG Finding "The Self-Describing Web" has been published noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Saturday, 7 February 2009

• Re: editorial: assorted noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: editorial: unclear use/misuse of "link" (vs. "link to") noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Friday, 6 February 2009

• Representation = entity in HTTPbis Jonathan Rees
• Approved minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Thursday, 5 February 2009

• Re: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 Henry S. Thompson

Wednesday, 4 February 2009

• RE: Request for feedback: HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: Request for feedback: HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery Phil Archer
• URN duri and tdb spec updated Larry Masinter
• TAG Telcon Agenda for 5th February 2009 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

Tuesday, 3 February 2009

• RE: Link: relation registry and 303 Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)
• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Phil Archer
• RE: Link: relation registry and 303 Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Julian Reschke
• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Phil Archer
• Re: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 John Kemp
• RE: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Anne van Kesteren
• RE: Link: relation registry and 303 Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)

Monday, 2 February 2009

• Re: Link: relation registry and 303 Mark Nottingham
• RE: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 Paul Cotton
• Re: Reminder: POWDER Document Suite: Second Last Call Working Draft noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• Re: Draft minutes for TAG telcon of 2009-01-29 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
• RE: Link: relation registry and 303 Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• RE: Link: relation registry and 303 Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
• Re: Reminder: POWDER Document Suite: Second Last Call Working Draft Phil Archer

Sunday, 1 February 2009

• Re: Introduction to URIs (was RE: WebArch introduction, sort of) Tim Berners-Lee
• RE: Request for feedback: HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Re: Request for feedback: HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery Jonathan Rees

Last message date: Saturday, 28 February 2009 23:33:50 UTC