• To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@b...>
• Subject: Re: Why RDF is hard
• From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
• Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:15:42 +0000
• Cc: dareo@m..., simonstl@s..., xml-dev@l...
• Organization: Propylon
• References: <AOEKLHGMHIHGNIBEDMNMOEFHDFAA.shelleyp@b...>
• Reply-to: bill.dehora@p...
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

> Dare Obasanjo:
>
> issue some direction on namespace documents and intended to recommend
> RDDL/RDF. This may not literally be "forcing" authorities that own XML
> namespaces to use RDF but it is >a strong push and some would at least call
> it coercion.

For an alternate take on GETting against a namespace, see Patrick 
Sticker's recent post to the TAG:

<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Nov/0118.html>

Bill de hÓra

• References:
  • RE: Why RDF is hard
    • From: "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp@b...>

• Prev by Date: Schema for imprecise times
• Next by Date: Re: ANN: Open XPath NG mailing list
• Previous by thread: RE: Why RDF is hard
• Next by thread: RE: Universal Applications, Universal Data
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread