W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > May 2003

RE: typed literals and language tags - suggested sub-agenda

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 13:10:18 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B5FBBC1@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 09 May, 2003 12:51
> To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com;
> w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: typed literals and language tags - suggested sub-agenda
> 
> 
> 
> [[
> A:  Option 2
>    straw poll:
>    "We prefer Option 2 to no change."

No.


> If Yes then

Don't you mean, if No, then

>      straw poll - we prefer option 1 to option 2     
>      straw poll - we prefer option 3 to option 2     
>      straw poll - we prefer option 4 to option 2
> 
> each with fors, against and strongly against (i.e. would vote 
> against in formal vote).
> 
> Chair to put question (option 1,2,3 or 4) based on results of 
> staw polls.
> 
> If no to A, then no question is put.

Why?

That seems to be somewhat manipulative.

One can prefer no change over option 2 yet still strongly
prefer option 1, 3, or 4 over both option 2 and over no change.

I would rather put the question as follows:

"We prefer one of the options 1-4 over no change"

If Yes, then

   Prefered options: any of 1 - 4, in order of preference
   Can live with:    any of 1 - 4
   Can't live with:  any of 1 - 4

--

My vote would then be:

"We prefer one of the options 1-4 over no change" - Yes

If Yes, then

   Prefered options: 4, 1
   Can live with:    2
   Can't live with:  3 (reason: making the wrapper real)
 
Patrick
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 06:10:47 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:29 EDT