- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 01:53:43 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Sounds to me as if we are happy with the nature of the beast - not the name - so the ugly name has served its short term goal and may now be honourably discharged. "Implementation Resource Descriptor" is exactly but awkwardly semantically correct - the object is a descriptor of a resource that defines some aspect(s) of implementation of a profile. If we are happy "schema" includes "guidance notes" then i guess it works - although it feels a bit weird. And note the range is not a schema, its a descriptor that qualifies a reference to the actual schema. prof:resource might be better or even prof:constraints - as the resource must specify constraints. "aspect" may be better. -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/195#issuecomment-381804381 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2018 01:53:50 UTC