ISSUE-10: Mark things as deprecated
PROPOSED: Mark certain features of RDF as "archaic". Document and discuss them, and their alternatives, in an Archaic Features Recommendation. Remove them from the main specifications, except for a pointer to that document. Discuss them with text like this:
This is an archaic feature of RDF. It was included in the RDF specifications published in 1999 and 2004, but we no longer recommend it be used in new deployments. Some existing software uses it, however, and it will be present in some archival data, so general purpose software must handle it correctly. See @@@ for a more information.
These features are ISSUE-12, ISSUE-13, ISSUE-24...27
PROPOSED: Mark xs:string as archaic for use in RDF, recommending use of plain literals instead. Recommend that systems silently convert xs:string data to plain literals.
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:XMLLiterals as archaic, recommending use of plain literals (containing charters which may be XML) instead. Remove them from the formal semantics, but keep them in the RDF/XML grammar and parser tests cases.
PROPOSED: Mark all aspects of Containers as archaic. Remove them from the formal semantics, but keep them in the RDF/XML grammar and parser test cases.
PROPOSED: postpone any action on RDF Reificiation until a GRAPHS design is agreed upon.
ISSUE-26: rdf:about instead of rdf:ID
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:ID (on node elements) as archaic, but keep it in the RDF/XML grammar and parser test cases.
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:value as archaic.