- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 00:04:09 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
OK - so lets just focus on what is proposed again: 1) the ability to declare conformance of a resource to a specific profile 2) the ability to indicate that a specific profile conforms to more general profiles (and I think we have just shown that this cant be done with any universally applicable constraint language - so thats the motivator here) 3) a flexible way of referencing the various forms of documentation in a way a machine can find an appropriate resource for a particular function. Whilst we can understand a desire for a universal validation use case, thats just not realistic (that would be the UDDI equivalent). So this related Use Case is limited to finding what resources are available and canonical description of them, not a canonical form of them. So, we can accept the comment "we don't have a conventional way to automatically validate data instances of application profiles (i.e. data which allegedly conforms to the constraints of a given application profile)" as a truism. I dont see a concrete need or proposal for change beyond stressing the scope. Adding in the "competency questions" section ( #732 ) should help keep scope in mind. -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/698#issuecomment-474147548 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 19 March 2019 00:04:12 UTC