- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:58:37 +0100
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Agh! I really should read e-mail threads bottom up... Right, take 2. So now I've gone back to the wiki and put back most of Richard's changes. I think the wording around not using terms from other vocabs where this one will do is fine in Dave's version so I've kept that. s/declare/define/ yes. Requiring given formats - OK - that makes sense. Dave - do you think that bullet could be added to ORG (you didn't include it). On 10/10/2012 08:56, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Phil, Dave, > > On 4 Oct 2012, at 15:59, Phil Archer wrote: >>> How about drafting a “boilerplate vocabulary conformance section” in >>> the wiki, with an eye towards using it (with variations where >>> appropriate) in all our vocabularies, but also with an eye towards >>> proposing it as something that's potentially applicable beyond GLD? >>> >>> Phil, do you want to take a first stab at this wiki page? >> >> Done http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Vocab-conformance > > Nice. I've tweaked it a bit. Diff here: > > http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/index.php?title=Vocab-conformance&diff=2907&oldid=2892 > > Changes: > > * Re-phrase the bit about not using terms from other vocabularies to simply say, "use terms from this vocabulary where possible" > * say that profiles may require specific concrete protocols, formats, and syntaxes > * s/declare/define/ > > Plus some of Dave's wording tweaks from ORG. > > Best, > Richard > -- Phil Archer W3C eGovernment http://www.w3.org/egov/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 13:07:49 UTC