Re: Review of RDF/JSON

On Aug 13, 2013 1:08 PM, "Andy Seaborne" <andy@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 12/08/13 23:12, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andy,
>> I've now gone through all your comments and updated the draft
>> accordingly. See below for further details.
>
>
> Hi Arnaud,
>
> Thanks.  One comment re Appendix A / Normative and one yet-another-thing
below.
>
>
>>
>> Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote on 07/01/2013 04:11:20 PM:
>>
>>  > From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
>>  > To: RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>,
>>  > Date: 07/01/2013 04:14 PM
>>  > Subject: Review of RDF/JSON
>>  >
>>  > http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-06-26#RDF__2f_JSON_as_Note
>>  >
>>  > == Process
>>  >
>>  > Either clarify the meaning of "normative"/"non-normative" in a Note
>>  > (maybe frame as "if this were a REC then ...") or remove.
>>  >
>>
>> I'm not convinced conformance has anything to do with whether the
>> document is a REC or not. Although the document is merely going to be a
>> Note it can still define what it means to conform to it, don't you think?
>
>
> Appendix A (MIME type registration) is "Normative" but we can't register
the MIME type because it is not a REC.
>
> (I am given to understand IETF will not consider a request from W3C until
a doc is at REC - hence I'm assuming that "NOTE" is insufficient". Seems a
bit heavy to me.)

The IETF makes it easy for W3C to register media types for W3C specs. I
don't know if that mechanism is specific to W3C RECS, but we can always use
conventional means to register a media type.

>         Andy
>
> PS Use of "must"
>
> ==>
> All keywords defined in this document are case sensitive, and must be
lowercase.
> -- italic "must"
>
> ==>
> optional but if supplied it must not be empty
> -- not italic
>
> (personally, I'd drop the paragraph in sec 2 "The key words ..." because
the document does not use that style - the quotes above are the only use of
"must" I could find)

IIRC, their was a discussion of whether 2112 keywords could appear in a
Note. Yes, they can, but because it's a Note, W3C isn't specifically
empowered to transport violators to Guantanamo.