- From: Jacob Jett <jgjett@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 08:52:17 -0500
- To: TB Dinesh <dinesh@servelots.com>
- Cc: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>, Web Annotation <public-annotation@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 3 July 2015 13:53:26 UTC
+1 On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:30 AM, TB Dinesh <dinesh@servelots.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org> > wrote: > > There have already been discussions that may lead to (minor, but > > nevertheless existing) changes in spec. On the other hand, the WG's > > document has no official trace back to the OADM, and this may lead to > > confusion. Consequently, changing the name of the document seems to be > > a cleaner way forward. > > > > I am sensitive to the namespace issue but, in fact, the same issue > > applies. The namespace may change (maybe some domain or range > > specifications will change, for example), so having a new namespace > > set at the beginning of the work is a small investment that may pay > > off in the future. RDF based implementations can simply change a URI > > in the namespace declaration, nobody forces them to change the prefix, > > ie, it does not seem to be a hugely expensive move (though indeed a > > pain). > > > > Bottom line: I am in favour of the change, even if I realize it is not > > an obvious move. > > > > -- > > GitHub Notif of comment by iherman > > See > > https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/46#issuecomment-118272210 > > > >
Received on Friday, 3 July 2015 13:53:26 UTC