W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: Agenda - 6 Mar @ 14:30 UTC

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 16:43:36 -0500
Message-Id: <E4EDC299-B77A-4769-A97C-06834B0807AA@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
To: Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>

On Mar 5, 2007, at 12:39 AM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:

> 3. Normative and informative, formal and informal parts of rq25
> Kendall's review of rq25:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/ 
> 0107.html
> ...raised the question of which parts of rq25 are normative and  
> which are
> informative. Andy replied that in general, numbered sections are  
> normative
> and appendixes are not unless otherwise specified. Andy also  
> indicated the
> need for WG discussion:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/ 
> 0121.html
> (midway through)

I think that's an okay rule, but (1) the document should say that,  
explicitly, somewhere; and (2) there will be some cleanups to conform  
to that rule.

In addition to the rule about what's normative and what isn't, I  
think the document needs to say how conflicts between different  
sections should be resolved. I'd like to see the grammar and algebra  
trump the exemplary, expository sections.

Right now the cost of resolving these when they come up -- and the  
comments list is full of them -- is relatively low. After this is a  
Rec and the WG has spun down, the cost will be much greater.

Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 21:44:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:53 UTC