W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Question about the On Linking Alternative Representations TAG Finding

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:25:22 +0100
Cc: wangxiao@musc.edu, Sebastien Lambla <seb@serialseb.com>, "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com>, john.kemp@nokia.com, www-tag@w3.org, kidehen@openlinksw.com
Message-Id: <D432897C-CF84-480D-92A4-4FAB995856EB@cyganiak.de>
To: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>

Ted,

The whole argument is sort of scattered through the thread and I'm not  
sure (doubt, actually) if all disagreements were resolved.

I suggest that if you want to take this forward, then you should draft  
something (bullet points at least), put it online somewhere and ask  
for comments.

I think a key points is that the document needs to make clear what it  
is trying to achieve. A clarification of Web architecture? A  
recommendation how to solve a particular problem using the modelling  
primitives of the Web/HTTP? What are the technical requirements for a  
solution?

It is also important to be extra-clear with terminology, as we have  
seen in the thread. For best results, include a glossary ;-)

Best,
Richard



On 18 Aug 2008, at 15:52, Ted Thibodeau Jr wrote:

> * On 2008/08/11 04:18 PM -0400, I wrote:
>> Several thoughts.
>
> ... which I've ellided here.
>
> Richard, all, I need to check -- was what I said clear?
>
> Did it resolve the points of contention and confusion?
>
> Are we now in agreement as to how alternative representations and
> resources are interrelated, and how con-neg is supposed to work?
>
> Can we now take that agreement and resolution back to LOD and the  
> other
> discussion arenas where confusion remains?
>
> I think reference back to the www-tag thread archive, along with a  
> brief
> summary (can we agree that the bullet points of my last post are a  
> good
> summary?), would be good to share in those other spaces.
>
> If points of confusion or disagreement remain, the conversation should
> probably continue ... but I hope that is not necessary at this point.
>
> Be seeing you,
>
> Ted
>
>
>
> -- 
> A: Yes.                      http://www.guckes.net/faq/ 
> attribution.html
> | Q: Are you sure?
> | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
>
> Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900  
> x32
> Evangelism & Support         //         
> mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
> OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http:// 
> www.openlinksw.com/
>                                 http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/uda/
> OpenLink Blogs              http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/ 
> virtuoso/
>                               http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/
>    Universal Data Access and Virtual Database Technology Providers
Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 15:26:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:56:19 GMT