W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ddwg@w3.org > December 2007

RE: [VOC] Shortname? (Was Re: [VOC] Comments on the current version of the vocabulary)

From: Ignacio Marin <ignacio.marin@fundacionctic.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:11:14 +0100
Message-ID: <09700B613C4DD84FA9F2FEA52188281902B84D41@ayalga.fundacionctic.org>
To: "Matt Womer" <mdw@w3.org>, "Rotan Hanrahan" <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>
Cc: José Manuel Cantera Fonseca <jmcf@tid.es>, "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>, <public-ddwg@w3.org>

It sounds fine to me.


Ignacio Marín Prendes
Fundación CTIC -Centro Tecnológico de la Información y la Comunicación-
Parque Científico y Tecnológico de Gijón
Edificio Centros Tecnológicos 
33203 Cabueñes - Gijón - Asturias
Teléfono: 984 29 12 12
Fax: 984 39 06 12

Este e-mail y cualquiera de sus ficheros anexos son confidenciales y pueden incluir información privilegiada. Si usted no es el destinatario adecuado (o responsable de remitirlo a la persona indicada), agradeceríamos lo notificase o reenviase inmediatamente al emisor. No revele estos contenidos a ninguna otra persona, no los utilice para otra finalidad, ni almacene y/o copie esta información en medio alguno.

Opiniones, conclusiones y otro tipo de información relacionada con este mensaje que no sean relativas a la actividad propia de CTIC deberán ser entendidas como exclusivas del emisor.


This e-mail is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient it may be unlawful for you to read, copy, distribute or otherwise make use of the information herein. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact us immediately. Fundación  CTIC will accept no liability for the mistransmission, interference, or interception of any e-mail and you are reminded that e-mail is not a secure method of communication.

-----Mensaje original-----
De: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] En nombre de Matt Womer
Enviado el: jueves, 13 de diciembre de 2007 17:55
Para: Rotan Hanrahan
CC: José Manuel Cantera Fonseca; Jo Rabin; public-ddwg@w3.org
Asunto: [VOC] Shortname? (Was Re: [VOC] Comments on the current version of the vocabulary)

Hi All,

I've been working on this publication with Rotan, and it occurs to me  
that we never discussed a shortname, I proposed:

Which would result in URIs like:

Any objections to those?

On Dec 12, 2007, at 9:37 AM, Rotan Hanrahan wrote:

> As the group has already taken a formal resolution to publish the  
> document based on the Editor's draft at the time of the resolution,  
> these and any subsequent comments regarding the document will be  
> directed towards the subsequent publication. Given that there are  
> several outstanding issues to consider (e.g. the definitions of  
> aspects, some additional properties etc.), the subsequent  
> publication will involve substantive updates.
> I urge the document editors to take on board any comments that have  
> appeared since the publication resolution and to reflect these in  
> the ongoing "editor's draft".
> We will be seeking further comments (from the public) when the  
> current draft is published, hopefully in the next few days.
> ---Rotan.
> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]  
> On Behalf Of José Manuel Cantera Fonseca
> Sent: 12 December 2007 14:21
> To: Jo Rabin
> Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org
> Subject: [VOC] Comments on the current version of the vocabulary
> Commenting [1]
> Editorial Comments:
> Abstract
> ---------
> + This document describes the Device Description Repository Core  
> Vocabulary for Content Adaptation in the Mobile Web, described in  
> the charter of the Device Descriptions Working Group, as well as the  
> process by which the vocabulary was defined
> Introduction
> -------------
> + The vocabulary makes reference to the ontology for the Web  
> Delivery Context which is being developed by the UWA [reference to  
> the UWA -WG] Working Group. [UWA-Ontology].
> + I would suggest to drop the sentence "Where necessary, the  
> ontology can be extended." or to rephrase it to make it more clear  
> the intended meaning
> 3 Properties
> -------------
> + Reading the document is not clear to me what is the actual  
> property identifier. I know that it is supposed to be the name in  
> the section title such as "3.1 vendor" but I think it will be better  
> to make explicit the  actual property identifier. Suggested:
> 3.1 'vendor' property
> 3.1.1 Description
> bla,bla
> 3.1.2 Property Identifier
> vendor
> 3.1.3 type
> bla, bla
> + 3.5.6 Identified as an important property by the DDWG in its Top N  
> finding. [Put a reference to the document] Present in UAProf [Put a  
> reference to UAProf]
> B Acknowledgements
> A small change,
> + José Manuel Cantera Fonseca, Telefónica Investigación y Desarrollo
> --- Additional Comments ---
> + The document does not talk about namespaces and property  
> namespacing, I think it is important to indicate that the Core  
> Vocabulary Properties are within a namespace identified by a URI to  
> be defined
> + Enumerations. I think we need an XMLSchema definition of the  
> enumerations described for certain properties in the vocabulary,  
> such as inputDevices. Also, the same comment as in the property id  
> applies here. We need to make explicit that the values put in the  
> table under the value column are the actual values that the  
> enumeration can contain i.e. those strings. I think this can be   
> made explicit by means of the XMLSchema enumeration definition.
> Last but not least, I'm a bit worried about the 'other' value you  
> mention in the draft.
> I think we need to drop it from the value column and say that  
> specific implementations can provide more values to this enumeration.
> Nothing more so far
> Best Regards
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/drafts/corevocabulary/071204.html
Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 08:11:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:00:15 UTC