- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 14:38:51 -0500
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > * Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com> [2007-05-03 00:28-0400] >> Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote on 04/17/2007 07:32:01 PM: >> >>> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 17:11 -0400, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: >>> [...] >>>> While I have a tiny bit of your attention, I was wondering if your >>>> objection to DESCRIBE still holds, given that DESCRIBE is now an >>>> informative part of the spec. >>> Really? that's news to me. I hear it was at-risk, not non-normative. >> I've had a bit of trouble following the paper trail, but I don't believe >> it was ever at-risk. In terms of published drafts, it's been marked >> informative since the March 2006 CR publication. > > I urge you to withdraw the objection. I can't defend lying down in the > road over DESCRIBE. I think you already have defended it; that is: The Director considered this objection earlier when granting CR for SPARQL, and there's no new information, so there's no reason for him to consider it again. I still think it's really bad to have it in the same language as the rest of SPARQL. I also think the current spec is goofy when it has DESCRIBE labelled informative in some places but it's included in the grammar. But OK... I guess my formal objection doesn't serve much purpose any more. I withdraw it. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 19:38:53 UTC