I must say I wonder. If we really plan to come out with a 1.1 soonish,
then re-issuing a new recommendation so soon after 1.0 may re-enforce
those whose argument is that RDFa was not ripe for publishing in the
first place. I am not sure we need that.
Having an errata is great. I wonder whether we
Mark raised the issue today of producing a 1.1 version of RDFa Syntax.
I think that's a fine idea, and that we should get started on it ASAP.
But I also think that we could almost immediately produce a Second
Edition as a PER. The things I would incorporate into such a document are:
* In
