Re: getting the nose-following document out the door

As I expected I have to delay.

I think what I'd like to do is aim for some kind of AWWSW decision on
endorsing this thing at our next telecon (April 12). If there is
agreement (perhaps subject to conditions), I'll plan to ship it as an
AWWSW document. Otherwise, I think I'll have it be a personal draft,
since I know how hard it is to get even two people to agree on
something.

I'm very bad at finishing documents, as some of you may remember with
the HCLS URI note; I generally need help in the form of critical
readers telling me the obvious problems I don't see. I can proceed
without, but the process is slower and the product poorer.

Jonathan

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
> I think the document "How to refer to something using a URI" is close
> to being ready to shove out the door (i.e. announce on www-tag) and
> I'd like to set a somewhat arbitrary deadline of March 31 for doing
> so... mainly because I'm getting tired of it.
>
> I have plenty of ideas for what happens at that point - ultimately we
> need some kind of consensus document, which means getting people
> involved - but this is the first step.
>
> Here are some things that need to be done
> - Maybe choose a different title. David doesn't like the current one.
> Maybe something along the lines of "conveying URI definitions".
> - Maybe get rid of the 'phrase' stuff, or gloss it somehow.  Generally
> diminish either the number of options or their prominence.
> - Better example. Using a mynah is very silly and I'm not sure I even
> still use its ability to talk. Maybe something geophysical, like a
> mountain or a road - ideally something that has RDF "in the wild".
> Suggestions welcome. I only need 2-3 triples describing the thing.
> - Some of the very short sections (3.2, 3.4, all subsections of 4) can
> be expanded.
>
> The /latest/ version fills out the summary table.
>
> I am going to try to get critical readings from a few people,
> especially Alan Ruttenberg, and each such reading will result in
> improvement and possibly overhaul. Of course it would be great to get
> comments from TimBL, Harry, Pat, and the other lurkers on this list
> before it goes out, but I'm not too hopeful.
>
> I've been staring at it for too long. so I can't tell what is going to
> confuse a general RDF or webarch audience.
>
> Jonathan
>

Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 21:09:07 UTC