W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2003

Comments on 18 September 2003 editors draft

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:36:39 -0700
To: <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <044901c37ef6$1d1f7000$fe2b000a@beasys.com>

I've sent Ian a UML diagram showing relationships between a number of terms
that we use in the document, such as: representation, data, metadata,
resource, uri, message, agent, format, media type, fragment identifier,
schema language.  I'd like to formally propose to the tag that we include a
diagram that shows the relationships between many of the terms that we talk
about in our document.  I have done the same in the extensibility and
versioning finding with the terminology diagram.  Ian has suggest that we
gradually introduce the terms, like rep/resource/uri, followed by
message/rep/data/metadata.  I like that idea a lot and support it.  I've
suggested another few diagram subsets that would be useful.  I do think that
we should have a complete model of most of the terms that we talk about, not
just fragments.  I'd like the tag to formally discuss and hopefully approve
this idea.  I suggest that this could be part of section 6, which has an
index to terms (ie glossary).  I'm amenable to various notational styles of
the model.  I simply picked uml as I'm familiar with it, it's somewhat
standardized, and I have tools for it.

I'd like to see a diagram in 3.1, pretty much what we had written up on the
board in vancouver.

Received on Friday, 19 September 2003 17:40:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:39 UTC