Re: Comments on the draft W3C Annotatea specification

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Comments on the draft W3C Annotatea specification

Stephen Crawley-2

And my sharp eyed colleague has just spotted another on:

27) There is a mistake in the example in section 3.1

<r:RDF xmlns:r="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
       xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/annotation-ns#"
       xmlns:d="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
       xmlns:tr="http://www.w3.org/2001/03/thread#"
       xmlns:h="http://www.w3.org/1999/xx/http#"
       xmlns:rt:"http://www.w3.org/2001/12/replyType">

The last xmlns declaration is missing a '#' after 'replyType'.  Actually,
this particular xmlns declaration defines a prefix that is not used in the
example and could therefore be deleted entirely.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Comments on the draft W3C Annotatea specification

Stephen Crawley-2

And yet another on:

28)  I think that the example request in section 4 contains a typo.
Shouldn't the second '?' character be a '&' character?

-- Steve