[rdfweb-dev] Re: FOAF 0.1: Organized, Explained, Collated, Part One

[Edd Dumbill]

On Sun, 2002-07-14 at 04:15, Morbus Iff wrote:
> ><foaf:nick foaf:domain="http://www.icq.com/" rdf:value="2927491" />
> 
> I find that much nicer, yes (and, in some
> degree, better). Dan and Ed, comments?

yes, it does like nicer. it's pretty much shorthand for what we were
proposing before. unfortunately my parser of choice doesn't correctly
parse that construction yet, though i've let the author know.

also, danbri suggested that we might leave foaf:nick alone and use
something like foaf:cnick for the more complex property.

-- Edd

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.usefulinc.com/pipermail/foaf-dev/attachments/20020715/6686885a/attachment-0001.pgp