- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:51:56 +0000
- To: edbark@nist.gov
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Ed Barkmeyer wrote: > So, if we are going to go beyond Dave Reynolds' "least common > denominator", we would be well advised to identify explicit "dialects" > or "subsets of expressiveness" that constitute "capability levels" or > "conformance classes". Just be clear, what I actually said was "err on the side of ...". I was not proposing a literal methodology of intersection of capabilities. I was saying we want some bias towards simplicity and commonality in our extensible core. Isn't that the point of the phase 1/2 split? If the phase 1 core has too much in the way of different expressivity options and capability levels then phase 2 will just explode. To me phase 1 should be about making some tasteful choices about this core. Dave
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2006 14:29:30 UTC