W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-diselect-editors@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: Gilman-11

From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 23:36:14 -0500
Message-Id: <p06110426c1770f30f8c4@[]>
To: public-diselect-editors@w3.org

I still have reservations about this disposition. While I don't
expect you to _provide_ profiles or mechanisms for integration of
this module into other namespaces,

a) there is something overweening about a module restricting its integrations.

b) namespace proliferation seems to be a big issue with the CDF WG.
If DISelect module technology is to be used client-side, and we hope
it will, we had better leave it to CDF and others to hammer out what
is going to happen to keep the namespace diversity down.

You don't have to _provide_ a mechanism other than namespacing this
vocabulary instance by instance, but you shouldn't sound as though
you are _precluding_ other modes of integration.

You might want to consider something like the language we are trying
in the States and Properties Module for Accessible Rich Internet
Applications (WAI-ARIA States and Properties)

.. in the Abstract:

This specification creates a language module implementing the
functional requirements of the abstract model that is ready for
incorporation in content format profiles that follow the methods of
XHTML Modularization [XHTMLMOD].


.. in the specification section:

This specification defines the States and Properties module for XHTML
[XHTML]. It also defines a representative profile which extends the
XHTML 1.1 - Full profile by adding this module.


Section 3.1 below discusses examples of how the module may be
integrated into language profiles. Section 3.2 below then defines the
particulars of the module.



At 11:30 AM +0000 1/4/06, Roland Merrick wrote:
>Greetings Al, thanks for your comments on the content selection last 
>call [1]. As part of this you include "Must use namespaces".
>The DIWG assigned this comment the identifier Gilman-11
>This mail documents DIWG's response to your comments.
>DIWG Response
>We do not intend to provide any mechanism to allow the inclusion of 
>DISelect within other language's namespaces.
>However, we agree with the point made in this comment that the 
>wording is unclear. We have expanded the description in the section 
>entitled 'The Namespaces' to make our intentions clear.
>Regards, Roland
Received on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 04:36:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:37:04 UTC