- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 07:33:42 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
So... you seem to modify your original proposal. In that one you just said: >> Web Resource >> A Resource that MUST be identified by an IRI, as described in the Web Architecture [webarch]. Web Resources MAY be dereferencable via their IRI. > > In relationship to External Web Resources, the general Specification of Web Resources looks like being related to the Internal Web Resources (i.e. Annotation IRI, AnnotationPage IRI, etc. ) I suggest changing the MAY be dereferencable to SHOULD be deferencable But you seem now to add an additional constraint, namely that *if the IRI is an HTTP URI* then it SHOULD be dereferencable. Which of course it is fine, because this is what webarch and the other documents say but, then, it seems to be superfluous to repeat in the WA Recommendation a statement that is already stated by other, authoritative groups. And, b.t.w., there is already a reference to webarch in the text (note, not a reference to the definition of an IRI, but to webarch, which addresses these types of issues!). Bottom line: I still do not see why the current text should be modified. Also, as @azaroth42 said, adding a strong requirement that currently no tested, and could be tested only with complex means, is also not a good idea. -- GitHub Notification of comment by iherman Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/372#issuecomment-258078491 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2016 07:33:48 UTC