- From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 00:00:48 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
Regarding (1) and (2), I wouldn't mind moving all of section 4 to a different namespace, including SpecificResource, State, Selector, Style and associated properties. Moving _just_ the Selector classes seems meaningless as: * You still need to have a oa:SpecificResource to attach the xxx:Selector to. * You still need to have something in the documentation pointing to the selector documentation, and vice versa for the SpecificResource. But given the above, I'm overall :-1: to the change as proposed as there's no real benefit from adding another namespace, and a not trivial amount of work to have Selectors go through the process separately from the rest of the model. I would be -0 to extracting the entire section. And I am strongly :-1: to (3). It's a lot of additional work, and I believe technically impossible given the current IETF standards around fragments. At the very least it would need the blessing of the TAG before starting work. -- GitHub Notification of comment by azaroth42 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/110#issuecomment-159108697 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 24 November 2015 00:00:50 UTC