ISSUE-138: Should we split Use machine-readable standardized data formats BP in two?

Should we split Use machine-readable standardized data formats BP in two?

State:
CLOSED
Product:
Data Usage Vocabulary
Raised by:
Carlos Iglesias
Opened on:
2015-01-22
Description:
more details: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0247.html
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. Re: Use machine-readable standardized data formats / Use non-proprietary data formats (from amgreiner@lbl.gov on 2015-08-12)
  2. Re: Use machine-readable standardized data formats / Use non-proprietary data formats (from phila@w3.org on 2015-08-12)
  3. Use machine-readable standardized data formats / Use non-proprietary data formats (from phila@w3.org on 2015-08-12)
  4. Re: Agenda for tomorrow's telco (from newton@nic.br on 2015-03-12)
  5. dwbp-ISSUE-138 (BernadetteLoscio): Should we split Use machine-readable standardized data formats BP in two? [Best practices document(s)] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2015-01-22)

Related notes:

The BP was divided in two.

Bernadette Farias Loscio, 26 Mar 2015, 16:30:34

Display change log ATOM feed


Chair, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: 138.html,v 1.1 2017/02/13 15:26:25 ted Exp $