W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > January 2008

comments on the N3 and Turtle team submissions

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:08:22 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20080116.090822.116999287.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: sandro@w3.org
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: Re: ISSUE-93 (Language tags): RFC 3066 - Tags for the Identification of Languages 
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:29:48 -0500

> 
> > > > 2/ The current document points to a document that is controlled by a
> > > >    single person.  I expect that this is not appropriate for a W3C
> > > >    rec-track document.
> > > 
> > > I'm not following this closely, but I think you're talking about the
> > > turtle spec, which got a step more official on Monday with:
> > >     http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/
> > > 
> > > (There's also http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/n3/)
> > > 
> > >        -- Sandro
> > 
> > Hmm.  Only one, small, step more official.
> 
> The main effect of this submission, as I understand it, is to guarantee
> (to the extent W3C can) that the document won't go 404.  That's required
> for some purposes (eg registration of the mime type).   
> 
> > 	By publishing this document, David Beckett and Tim Berners-Lee
> > 	have made a formal submission to W3C for discussion. Publication
> > 	of this document by W3C indicates no endorsement of its content
> > 	by W3C, nor that W3C has, is, or will be allocating any
> > 	resources to the issues addressed by it. This document is not
> > 	the product of a chartered W3C group, but is published as
> > 	potential input to the W3C Process. Please consult the complete
> > 	list of acknowledged W3C Team Submissions.
> > 
> > I note that the n3 submission is full of typos and other grammatical
> > problems, including at least five in the "Status of This Document"
> > section.  The Turtle submission also has a typo in its "Status of This
> > Document" section.
> 
> TimBL sometimes jokes that if he got the typos out of his work, no one
> would believe he wrote it.  (Although I don't think the SOTDs are from
> him.)
> 
> If you've actually read through the documents, it'd be great if you'd
> send along any constructive comments you have.
> 
>      - s

As I've said in some other contexts, I'm willing to provide what I
consider to be constructive comments on many documents, however, I don't
guarantee that the authors will like my comments.

peter
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 14:36:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 January 2008 14:36:28 GMT