- From: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>
- Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 17:13:26 +1100
- To: Dataset Exchange Working Group <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACfF9LzBa5xD369ncU-2tEFGqSxEje8_F-nOt87thL0j3=OXAA@mail.gmail.com>
hi, its great to see a lot of quite profound debate going on in a range of issues on the nature of profiles, happening in the right place in git issues. There may be a little overlap in discussions so as an editor can I ask people getting deep into such threads to do a sanity check and make sure all the issues you are concerned about are reflected inline, in the right place, in all the drafts of deliverables, so its possible to work through those documents and pick up all your insights, suggestions and concerns in a systematic way. for example, fundamental questions about the nature of profiles feel like they may be popping up in multiple places, with questions about extension, authoritative artefacts, axioms related to inheritance, expressiveness of constraint languages, and roles of artefacts w.r.t. base specifications (full or partial constraint sets). Whilst I have tried to track all these and dont think there are any fundamental problems, each of them tends to revisit the same issue around the nature of conformance and inheritance of conformance requirements, and we can't afford to have the whole debate over and over. Maybe its all under control but I think its important we are all satisfied that the discussions we are having are being fed into the drafts, and we can start to close out these issues, and systematically cascade decisions to help address all related issues. Cheers Rob Atkinson
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2019 06:14:25 UTC