Re: RFD: contents.rdf Spec v0.1

> 0) Note that about and resource are now rdf:about and rdf:resource, to
> get the W3C online validator to stop complaining.

+1 :)

> 1) The URN scheme is now simply URLs.  It isn't worth explaining the
> difference.  For a folder, use a URL ending in a "/".

+1

> 2) The URN is now the same as the source URL.  We will likely get rid
> of the oscom:sourceurl property as it is redundant.

+1

> 3) Previously, the dc:creator was an rdf:resource, meaning a reference
> to a separately-defined, globally-unique resource.  I think that's too
> hard for servers to support right now, so simply use a string.

+1

> 7) dc:creator, dc:description, and dc:subject should be considered
> optional.

+1

> 10) We need to have a debate about "article" vs. "document" (or
> "page") for the name of the resourcetype across systems.

getting into semantic territory here huh

> 11) Do we need an encoding attribute in the XML declaration?

dunno

its no fun if all your proposals make as much sense as they do :) +1 +1 +=
1
lol

-gregor