- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:05:13 +0000
- To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>, kcoyle@kcoyle.net, "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Arnaud, > On 20 Mar 2015, at 00:05, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > the possible problem you're pointing out has to do with having different people work independently rather than having multiple documents. The same would be true if we had one document with various sections independently edited by different people. You’re hitting the nail on the head. The problem is that this WG has different people working independently. Splitting the document makes that problem worse. > And there are plenty of examples of specifications that depend on one another, without having been put all into the same document (thankfully). RDF 1.1 and its 7+ related specs is one of those. RDF-WG standardised 8 different languages, all of which had a long life and name recognition prior to the WG. Richard
Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 11:05:46 UTC