- From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 19:02:48 +0200
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
FYI -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Your comments on RDF Concepts & Semantics (ISSUE-145, ISSUE-147, ISSUE-148, ISSUE-159) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 16:54:57 +0000 Resent-From: <public-rdf-comments@w3.org> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:54:28 +0200 From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl> To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org> CC: public-rdf-comments@w3.org Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org> Hi David, Thanks again for taking the time to review our specs and sending comments. Given the timeline of the WG we would like to move forward, if possible. We would be obliged if you could indicate whether you can live with the responses we sent you w.r.t the following four issues: ISSUE-145 (https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/145): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Oct/0027.html ISSUE-147 (https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/147): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Oct/0046.html ISSUE-148 (https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/148): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Oct/0029.html ISSUE-159 (https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/159): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Oct/0044.html It is not our intention to hasten you, but it would really be helpful if you can send a reply before next Tuesday. Thanks a lot in advance for considering this, Guus
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 17:03:16 UTC