Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)

On 15 Oct 2011, at 11:12, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> On 15 October 2011 11:01, Ian Davis <id@talis.com> wrote:
>> FWIW I find the term archaic slightly derogatory.
> 
> I've used it in FOAF since it doesn't offend me as editor of FOAF
> spec; and as for instance data publishers, I think it has about the
> right level of unsettlingness about it. But I'm curious if it is also
> derogatory to publishers of data that use the old-fashioned terms.
> That wouldn't be so nice...


I thinknits different in a formal standard. Companies don't like it
when their competitors characterise them as relying on archaic
technology.



> 
> Dan

Ian