- From: stephane boyera <boyera@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:39:29 +0200
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: public-ccpp2-comments@w3.org
Dear Ivan, Like the WG explained for the issue LC-1772, this specification is concerning CC/PP not RDF. Again, yes, there are CC/PP specific parsers(see LC-1772 [1]) for this stuff. We're documenting the existing reality, not where we would go if we were starting again. We're trying to produce a firm foundation for the EXISTING OMA UAProf 2 spec, that's all. The WG still wants to reject your comment. Please let us know if this resolution is ok with you. Best regards Stephane [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ccpp2-comments/2007Aug/0015.html Ivan Herman wrote: > O.k. I understand this but I think the formulation is not really correct > and misleading. I think what you say is that a component must have _only > one default_. In OWL terms, what you seem to say is that the > corresponding predicate is inverse functional (which, in OWL, can be > expressed directly). > > I maintain that the type of differentiation you make, with the text you > use, is incorrect from the RDF point of view because there is strictly > no difference between what you denote as inline and external. In other > words, what happens here is that you impose an extra 'semantics' (sorry > for the word) on the RDF/XML encoding which no off-the shelf parser > would understand. Ie, a CC/PP implementation will have to use its own > parser instead of an external one (after parsing the RDF/XML code the > resulting RDF Graph will bear absolutely no trace whether the default > was 'external' or not...) > > Ivan > > stephane boyera wrote: >> Dear Ivan, >> >> Thank you for your comment on CC/PP: Structure and vocabularies 2.0 ([1]) >> Your comment on "CC/PP Structure, section 3.3" ([2]) has been referenced >> as LC-1773. Please use this reference for further discussion on this >> mailing-list. >> >> The WG decided to reject this comment. >> The requirement is to prevent the usage, within a component, of both a >> link to an external default and an inline one. Some components in one >> profile may have an inline ccpp:defaults, some others may have a link to >> an external documents. The rational for not allowing both inline and >> external reference in one component is to prevent conflicting >> information, and to avoid having to define precedence, profile matching, >> and rules of conflict resolutions. Such complexity is not appropriate >> for describing ccpp:defaults. >> >> Please, let us know if you agree with this decision >> Best Regards, >> >> On behalf of the UWA WG, >> Stephane Boyera >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-CCPP-struct-vocab2-20070430/ >> [2] >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ccpp2-comments/2007Jun/0002.html >> [3] http://www.w3.org/2007/uwa/editors-drafts/ccpp2/ >> > -- Stephane Boyera stephane@w3.org W3C +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 34 BP 93 fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22 F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 24 August 2007 13:39:44 UTC