- From: Nicholas Car via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 11:23:27 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@aisaac
> The statement `ex1:Standard_X a prof:Profile` may not be wrong, but it does not add anything useful to the example and thus it could be removed.
I don't follow: the Resource Descriptor `ex1:RD_1` is defined by that profile (`ex1:Standard_X prof:hasResource ex1:RD_1`) and since that's the the Resource Descriptor that's the focus of the inheritance, we need to see where it comes from, i.e. not `ex2:Profile_Y` but that it's inherited.
> Of course the comment next to it ("this may be a 'null' profile [...]") would go away as well, which as @kocyle pointed, is good for the understanding of the example.
Sure, we can remove that.
> Wrong comments:
* RS 2 in diagram should refer to Resource Descriptor 2
* RS 3 in diagram should refer to Resource Descriptor 3
Correct, will fix
> In the diagram, I guess Profile X, Resource Descriptor 2 should be Profile Y, Resource Descriptor 2
Correct again!
--
GitHub Notification of comment by nicholascar
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/858#issuecomment-477554873 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2019 11:23:28 UTC