W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > December 2006

Re: HTTP Vocab, header property naming

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 19:22:37 +0100
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd0612271022p60846d5eqfa8739f3a54b3fae@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>, public-wai-ert@w3.org

On 27/12/06, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 13:50:14 +0100, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Danny,
> >
> > Thank you for your review comments, we will consider your suggestions.
> > However, note that the names for the terms came from the respective RFCs
> > and we didn't want to change too much (not even the camelBack notation).
> >
> > We would be interested in your implementation experience, especially in
> > information about an application that makes use of the vocabulary.

Thanks Shadi.

> In particular, what happens when we carefully provide a proper human
> readable
> title for the resource. Does it still assume that the identifier we used
> for it
> is the most human-readable thing available?

Well no, with the (GRDDLish) material I'm playing with any application
will ignore the human-readability of a property identifier or
resource's title. But if anyone has to debug this stuff they might not
be so deterministic.



Received on Wednesday, 27 December 2006 18:22:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:27 GMT