- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:14:23 +0200
- To: W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>
On 01/06/16 16:05, Ivan Herman wrote: > >> On 1 Jun 2016, at 15:38, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> Thanks for the feedback on this. >> >> I will forward the suggestions for motivation vs subclassing. >> >> About the introduction of new motivation(s) in WA to support our case: I think Rob's solution is workable on our side. >> Is it possible to know when the WA group would make a decision about it? >> I reckon that if DQV keeps dqv:qualityAssessment and the only change we have to make is to add a skos:broader statement between it and a new 'assessment' motivation in the WA namespace, this can be done very easily. But it would make our life easier if we can have an idea of when the motivation would be available for us to link to. >> > > Once things are decided and the document published, we should also think about submitting an official comment on DQV because we all agreed that what is done there is not what we would favour. The comment could either come from you, Antoine, or from the WG, in which case it can be submitted by the chairs or by me. > For the record I've already started to raise a flag about it in my report on the discussion to the DWBP mailing list [1]. But an official (and maybe more accurate) comment from the group would be welcome! Antoine [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2016Jun/0002.html
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2016 14:14:53 UTC