[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Clarifying text:meta-field problem [earlier"Groups - Metadata SC meeting added"]
Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > > On Apr 3, 2007, at 7:52 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote: > >> I had gotten the impression that the RDF was doing to declare the >> semantics of the field, that is a generic field mechanism with a rule >> that whatever content is has is preserved on save so that a >> non-enabled application can see the data. > > No, we've had no resolution. > > We spent months solving the question of in-content literals, but I > think in-content resource references (e.g. text:meta-field) have > gotten less careful attention. And I actually think they're more > critical to this work. > > I think Svante and Florian understand what I've been saying (in part > as a result of some off-list discussion), but am not sure. I can not speak for Florian, but I have to admit, I am not able to define your problem. Could you give it a further try, telling me what problem can not currently be solved by our text:meta-field approach (e.g. using xml:id and RDF/XML)? Svante
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]