- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 19:16:10 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 05:24:54PM -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > I just made them world-readable... and linked them from > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/DesignEvaluations Gracias. > > I made up a namespace for the WG and for the UCR doc, as well as some > > predicates in each namespace. > > Hmm... why? Why not: > > @prefix ucr: <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/design-eval#>. Good question. I'll think a bit more about this and update them if I change stuff. (Or are you making a "only the WG itself can do this" argument?) > odd... the namespace prefixes aren't used in cases like > ucr:supports <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/UseCases#r3.4>; > > is that because of the tool you used to produce the file? Yes. I'll definitely be fixing this. > and regarding > ucr:not-evaluated <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/UseCases#d4.8> > > that seems better left unsaid. Why? > > identify the designs we evaluated (since I wasn't sure they all had > > stable "home pages", and I don't like the "home page stands for foo" > > idiom much). > > Hmm... Why TAG URIs? Why not fragments of design-eval, again? Because no one will try to deref a TAG URI and the requirements and design objective URIs *can* be deref'd. I wanted this distinction to be clear. Kendall
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2004 19:16:24 UTC