- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 23:16:19 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@kcoyle - correct those concerns are dealt with in different issues. There is one other concern hidden in here, but its out of scope for this issue as stated - and that is whether it is possible to create a "consolidated" form of validation resource for a given choice of constraints language (and the answer is of course but thats a matter for constraints languages) and describe the role it plays We have a role "validation" with a comment "This role implies inclusion or import of inherited constraints" which is distinct from "constraints" which are the specific constraints that a profile adds to its base specifications. These are not disjoint - you can declare that a resource both defines constraints and can validate conformance to the profile. 2PWD has quite explicitly indicated a way to do this, and individuals may or may not "see the need" for this - it doesnt require an open issue to capture non-interest in part of a specification. So we should close this issue and only raise another issue if someone wants to propose improvements to those existing role names or definitions which were already released in 2PWD. -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/698#issuecomment-524490023 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 23 August 2019 23:16:21 UTC