- From: Ruben Verborgh <Ruben.Verborgh@UGent.be>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:23:38 +0000
- To: "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- CC: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Dear all, I have been through the "6.8 profile" section of the requirements, and have the following remarks: – in 6.8.1, items 9 and 15 seem to overlap (parents being a specific case) – in 6.8.1, item 10 seems overly specific and can probably be combined with 9 – in 6.8.1, item 16 is too strict. Either make it "may" or "should", or remove it – in 6.8.1, the remark at the end of 19 should probably be removed – In 6.8.1, as discussed during the F2F, I think we don't sufficiently differentiate between the profile as a concept (e.g., "a profile for author metadata") versus the document that expresses the constraints (e.g., "authors have one last name"). We could have a requirement for "Definition of the concept 'profile'", and a separate requirement for "Representation of a profile" (which could be 6.8.4). Looking at the list in 6.8.1, the following items would be part of the second requirement: 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19 – (editorial) copy/paste error at the end of 6.8.1 13 – (editorial) inconsistent capitalization in 6.8.1 13–19 – 6.8.2 introduces "information profile", this should simply be "profile" – in 6.8.4, "profile information" is probably not the good term. I think we should use "representation". Best, Ruben
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2017 14:27:50 UTC