From: Dan Connolly ([email protected])
Date: 03/03/01
> > Dublin core is at-risk because of C) as well as D), IMO. > > If you believe this, can I ask that you provide a summary of the risk as > you see it that I can get onto the DCMI Architecture agenda as a matter > of urgency. Er... I've told you; you're the chair. Our conversation has a public archive (MikeD, where is that archive? I know it's around somewhere, but I don't see it at http://www.daml.org/committee/). What else do you want me to do? If you want me to argue and defend a position in the DCMI arch group, sorry, I don't have spare time in my schedule for new commitments just now. > Extra points if you can reference W3C specs that DC's > RDF implementation violates. My argument isn't based on W3C specs; as I said, it's "Based on the experience I have building tools and apps", which see http://www.w3.org/2000/01/sw/ -- Dan Connolly
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST