W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Preparing editor's drafts -- Q's for the team contacts

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 11:10:08 +0200
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <9AB78EB7-32A2-401A-8EE1-2B563C6CB70E@w3.org>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>

On May 25, 2011, at 11:02 , Andy Seaborne wrote:

[snip]
> 
>> I guess it may be possible to use a short name for the development
>> time and change this on the last minute to switch to the old names
>> but I would not favour that, personally; it may become messy on long
>> run. Note also, that it should be possible, if we go for an RDF 1.1
>> route, to have a note added to the old RDF document making it
>> 'editorially' obsolete when we publish our recs, see, for example,
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/
>> 
>> _Personally_ I would go for RDF 1.1 with option #2. But that is my
>> personal choice, with my staff contact or activity lead hat off...
> 
> Sandro advised SPARQL-WG (yesterday) that that WG publish using /sparql11-query/ until REC then put it at /rdf-sparql-query/ to replace the version people find when looking for the REC.
> 

Which just shows that the W3C Team is not a monolithic organization and the team people do not always agree on everything:-)

More seriously: this is fine if we keep to the old document structure (which, I believe, is what we plan). If the structures become different (which was the OWL or the RDFa case) then these redirections may become a bit complicated...

Ivan


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2011 09:08:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:43 GMT