W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2004

On the treatment of Design Objectives?

From: Yoshio Fukushige <Fukushige.Yoshio@jp.panasonic.com>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 01:13:18 +0900
Message-ID: <025b01c43772$dfb27330$1a48b4db@delldell>
To: "RDF Data Access Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

Hello, all

I want to know what you think we should do with the design objectives.

Are we going to standardize the protocols for optional functionalities
listed in the  design objectives section,
or jest leave them to the developers?
In the latter case, there could be varieties of them designed by different
developers.
Are we happy with that?

I think there are two types of optional functionalities:
(1) those would require too much time to make standards for
(2) those relatively easy to make standards for, but not suitable to force
all implementations to support

I propose for us to write the standard protocols for those of type (2)
above, and mark them "OPTIONAL."

I know if we introduce levels of implementation, we need some protocol for
negotiating the conversation level
between the server and the client, but I think we need it at the end of the
day (cf. UC 2.6)

What do you say?

# I wanted to discuss it in the telecon, but there was not enough time...

Best regards,
Yoshio
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2004 12:13:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:19 GMT