W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sml@w3.org > November 2008

RE: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF

From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:17:22 -0500
To: "public-sml@w3.org" <public-sml@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF887B1AEB.0AF6E3EA-ON85257507.005308BF-85257507.0053FC9E@us.ibm.com>
Hmm... my reading of  certainly seems to be 1 doc/nsURI
[section 2] In all Member and Team Submissions:
1.      Namespace URIs MUST be dereferenceable, and
2.      Namespace Documents MUST describe the relationship between the 
defining specification and the namespace URI
[section 3]
A Namespace Document describes the namespace, providing directly or by 
reference information for human and also, ideally, machine consumption. A 
Namespace Document is available for retrieval using a corresponding 
namespace URI. 
Note section 2 says each nsURI must be dereferenceable (a bit obtusely 
because it mixes singular and plural), section 3 says document (singular) 
describes ns (singular).  At the bottom of the page there is a mechanism 
to submit comments, if the users of the document cannot figure it out that 
seems like pretty good reason to comment (and, following our own editorial 
"good practices", that means drafting a replacement they can start from). 
Unless the working group feels those comments need to be vetted by the wg, 
I personally would be fine if someone chose to submit comments on their 
own behalf... we can discuss later today if anyone feels the need.
If you want a "what is normal practice" read Kumar, you might ask Jules. 
If we are contemplating sending the NS documents with the CR draft, he 
probably would feel better knowing about their arrival beforehand. 
(Although, if we did send the draft on 11/18, I'm now talking about the 
past using future tense, what would Ford Prefect say?)

Best Regards, John

Street address: 2455 South Road, P328 Poughkeepsie, NY USA 12601
Voice: 1+845-435-9470      Fax: 1+845-432-9787



From:
Kumar Pandit <kumarp@windows.microsoft.com>
To:
Len Charest <Len.Charest@microsoft.com>, "public-sml@w3.org" 
<public-sml@w3.org>
Date:
11/18/2008 03:18 PM
Subject:
RE: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF




Good question. It is not clear from the w3c guidelines whether we need 3 
or just 1 policy doc.


-----Original Message-----
From: Len Charest
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:16 AM
To: Kumar Pandit; public-sml@w3.org
Subject: RE: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF

Point of clarification: Since the specs collectively define 3 namespaces, 
shouldn't we provide 3 namespace documents - one per namespace?

-Len

From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On 
Behalf Of Kumar Pandit
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 10:14 PM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Cc: Kumar Pandit
Subject: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF

Here is the namespace policy for SML & SML-IF. I drafted it based on 
example 2 in section 4 of http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri. Please take 
a look and send your feedback by eod Tuesday 11/18. We are planning to 
send the CR draft to the webmaster on Tue 11/18. I think we may also want 
to send the namespace policy document along with it.

Kumar

=====

SML and SML-IF Namespace Policy

The SML and SML-IF specifications define the following namespaces.

1. http://www.w3.org/ns/sml
2. http://www.w3.org/ns/sml-function
3. http://www.w3.org/ns/sml-if

The namespace URIs use the http://www.w3.org/ns/ssss format as recommended 
in section 1 of the URIs for W3C Namespaces document.

Names in the namespaces listed above are defined in version 1.1 of SML and 
SML-IF specifications, and may  also be defined in future versions of the 
two specifications. The specifications define language extension 
mechanisms and how to handle changes such as the addition of new terms to 
the language. W3C reserves the right to determine which changes (backward 
compatible or not) are in the interest of the community at large.
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2008 15:18:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 November 2008 15:18:03 GMT