Hi Benjamin, > I would prefer the order I stated, but merging the sections into subsections + > giving a simple title would be sufficient. After reconsidering this I think you're right, I'll switch the (now sub)sections on the schema and the datamodel. >>>7 can be put in appendix, section 6 must be put in appendix. >> >>Sects. 5 and 7 explain how to query WN and the different available >>versions. These seem important issues to the average user, so putting >>these into appendices would diminish their visibility. > > > OK but merge. - Sect 5: explains how to query online and that CBDs are returned and the different URI forms. (This last subsection could be merged with Appendix G? Or the introduction could contain more info on the URI format? I see now there are 3 places where URI formats are explained. This seems too much.) - Sect 6: explains the difference between Full and Basic versions - Sect 7: explains the different versions (2.0, 2.1, ...), the redirection strategy and lists the downloadable files Do you mean that these three sects should be merged into one? That would be a whole section "Selecting and Querying the appropriate WN version"? What ordering would you recommend? Thanks, Mark. >>[1]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/WNET/wn-conversion.html >>[2]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2006Mar/0076 >>[3]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Dec/0088 >>[4]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Dec/0092.html >> >>-- >> Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam >> markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark >> >> > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. > -- Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~markReceived on Monday, 27 March 2006 19:18:50 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:21 GMT