- From: Karen Coyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 06:06:02 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
My main problem is that there seem to be two different uses of profile being discussed in the document, and it would be much less confusing if these were not both called profile. The document is content negotiation by profile, and in that sense it refers to the requested resource that is a profile (not just a specification, but a profile). So that's the target of the content negotiation. Then it refers to " profiles of this specification's Abstract Model which are implementations of it in different environments" which are functions of the content negotiation implementation, NOT the resources that are the target of the content negotiation. Even worse is that within that there is reference to the first type of profiles. I have not generally heard of functions like the ones described here referred to as "profiles." I think it is a stretch to call these "A specification that constrains, extends, combines, or provides guidance or explanation about the usage of other specifications." They are specifications, but I unless EVERY specification meets that definition, then I don't think that these do. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1022#issuecomment-534868380 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2019 06:06:04 UTC