- markup (76)
- xml (11)
- xslt (23)
- pipelines (8)
- atom (9)
- overlapping markup (6)
- schema (11)
- creole (5)
- dtll (1)
- xforms (1)
- xpath (1)
- xquery (2)
- coding (2)
- datagovuk (1)
- genealogy (4)
- hardware (1)
- linked data (15)
- named graphs (1)
- opendata (1)
- psi (3)
- skos (1)
- sparql (4)
- Talis (7)
- unicode (1)
- uri (4)
- versioning (1)
- visualisation (6)
- web (77)
- google (4)
- html5 (5)
- jQuery (2)
- rdf (45)
- ontologies (2)
- rdfa (8)
- rdfQuery (5)
- rest (6)
- wikis (1)
- work (3)
- legislation (2)
- xmlsummerschool09 (2)
- life (28)
- children (5)
- equality (6)
- gtd (1)
- environment (4)
- gadgets (5)
- software (3)
- xlinq (2)
- conferences (11)
- ukgc09 (1)
- xtech (9)
- xtech2008 (3)
- blog (8)
- drupal (3)
Recent posts
- 1 week 5 days ago
- 6 weeks 3 days ago
- 13 weeks 6 days ago
- 15 weeks 1 day ago
- 15 weeks 5 days ago
Recent comments
- Glass20Hilda (not verified)
- Anonymous (not verified)
- Landong Zuo (not verified)
- Herbert Van de Sompel (not verified)
- John S. Erickson, Ph.D. (not verified)
Re: Evolving Standards
No, I won’t.
You threw this proposal into the spec. You did. There’s no guarantee, at all, this will stay in the spec. In fact, every indication it won’t.
So, why, on earth, are we spending time on something that is just as likely to vanish in a few weeks?