- From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 12:58:51 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@rob-metalinkage yes I meant the example. And the comment "there may be cases where conformance is not transitive that are out of scope for this model and not evidenced strongly enough or early enough to consider supporting." could be a way forward. But not for cases that are part of our use cases and requirements. And not for situations (partial vocabulary re-use) that seem to be in scope of our definition for profile definition or for our charter (which sees application profile as a way to handle the issue that "no single vocabulary offers a complete and universally accepted solution."). I reckon that there was a discussion on whether vocabulary-reuse counts as profiling, and how much re-use would be needed for the re-use to qualify as profiling. I'm not sure where the issue was (there are too many of them!). But if the issue has not be decided on by consensus, then we can't dismiss @agreiner 's case and mine this easily. -- GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/844#issuecomment-531227137 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 13 September 2019 12:58:52 UTC