• To: shelleyp@b... (Shelley Powers)
• Subject: Re: RDF and the new releases
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:37:13 -0500 (EST)
• Cc: simonstl@s... (Simon St.Laurent), xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <AOEKLHGMHIHGNIBEDMNMEEIBDEAA.shelleyp@b...> from "Shelley Powers" at Nov 15, 2002 11:00:26 AM

Shelley Powers scripsit:

> Telling people
> "Well, if you just do this and this and that and that and this and don't
> forget to do _that_" to coerce them into ensuring their XML is
> RDF-compliant, when they don't see a need or a purpose for it, is a mistake.

Ahem.  I strongly object to your use of the word "coerce".  The intention of
Bob duCharme and I was to _persuade_, a very different thing.

-- 
John Cowan                              <jcowan@r...>
http://www.reutershealth.com            http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
                .e'osai ko sarji la lojban.
                Please support Lojban!          http://www.lojban.org

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: RDF and the new releases
    • From: "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp@b...>
  • Re: RDF and the new releases
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • RE: RDF and the new releases
    • From: "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp@b...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Changing XForms 1.0 Semantics in XPath 1.0?
• Next by Date: Re: RDF and the new releases
• Previous by thread: RE: RDF and the new releases
• Next by thread: Re: RDF and the new releases
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread