- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:46:28 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
The options are indeed the question - and they implicate whether or not we can provide any recommendations about the accepted requirements. We may choose not to offer suggested solutions where none is identified. However, I think the separation of these concerns is false - profileDesc is providing an option for a solution for the first two concerns, where no other option has yet been identified, and is only "conflated" in that sense, its not a separate concern nor an alternative solution - its a direct response to the requirements arising from these. Then, "description" and a "model for description" to separate - you cant have a description without a model for that description. And if that model is not published in a formalism you simply cant have an interoperable description. -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/323#issuecomment-416570334 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2018 12:46:29 UTC