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

DD Definition [WAS: RE: Meeting Summary - 26 March 2007]

From: Rotan Hanrahan <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:20:46 +0100
Message-ID: <D5306DC72D165F488F56A9E43F2045D3F0CCC6@FTO.mobileaware.com>
To: <public-ddwg@w3.org>

It might not be the form of language used by bloggers, which is not
surprising as this is a formal definition. The definition was reached
after much debate by the active members of the DD group, and while it
may not be perfect, we felt it was sufficient to capture our best
understanding.

This led to the text being published on the public mailing list,
following one of our regular weekly meetings (in which the active
participants spend an hour discussing the week's issues). We are
certainly interested in public comment and contributions, and the
observation by Christian is most welcome. We will add notes and examples
in the wiki in due course.

The use of "some context" does give flexibility to the user of the
definition. We anticipate (hope) that it will be adopted beyond the
DDWG, though it's likely we'll have to negotiate a few adjustments to
the wording.

It was certainly not the intention, as indicated by Luca in his public
comment on this W3C list, to create something that would cause people to
laugh at the DD's work. We take our work seriously, and the production
of a formal definition reflects this. If those who have understood the
formal English description would like to propose some less-formal
interpretations, these would be useful (especially as they would tell us
what other people think we have said, rather than just what we ourselves
think we have said).

Thank you for your support.

---Rotan.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Christian Timmerer (ITEC)
Sent: 29 March 2007 09:39
To: 'Luca Passani'; public-ddwg@w3.org
Cc: christian.timmerer@itec.uni-klu.ac.at
Subject: RE: Meeting Summary - 26 March 2007



Dear Luca, all,
  as someone who's not "deep inside esoteric W3C lingo" I cannot make
this
observation that the definition means nothing.

My two cents are as follows:
 - However, the definition could be extended by notes/examples that
helps
the reader to better understand the definition.
 - The wording "some context" in first part of the definition causes
some
confusion to me because to me it means that this context needs to be
defined
by those who are adopting this definition. I'm wondering whether this
interpretation is correct/intentional.

Thanks.
Best regards,
 -Christian

:--
:- Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Christian Timmerer
:- Department of Information Technology (ITEC)
:- Klagenfurt University, Austria
:- http://research.timmerer.com
:----------------------------------------------------------

>> Visit the IT Campus Carinthia
>> http://www.it-campus.at


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Luca Passani
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 8:52 AM
> To: public-ddwg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Meeting Summary - 26 March 2007
> 
> 
> 
> "A device description is a formal definition within some context of
the
> named attributes and their permissible values [which may take the form
> of
> lists, ranges, or other patterns] which are applicable to entities of
> interest in that context,"
> 
> this is not english. It means nothing. It may mean something to those
> deep
> inside esoteric W3C lingo. Certainly not suitable for a blog as it is
> unless
> you want people to laugh at DD's work.
> 
> Luca
> 

[...]
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 09:21:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:00:13 UTC