- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:08:40 +0000
- To: SWBPD <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
I have an action to point the WG at relevant documentation: 1) A draft note describing the problem and the syntax (excludes two issues see (2)) http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-10-27-CURIE 2) A shortish e-mail, describing the solution to the URI / CURIE ambiguity issue, and the bnode issue. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Sep/0022 3) A well-argued e-mail (on the CURIE side) in a discussion revealing lack of consensus for CURIEs. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Nov/0049 ======== Also note that we are discussing whether the CURIE syntax should or should not be based on QName syntax. If should, then dc:title would be a CURIE (as well as a qname) If should not then dc:title may be written as [dc]title say. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2005 12:09:17 UTC