- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@miscoranda.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 23:51:30 +0100
- To: public-earl10-comments@w3.org
public-earl10-comments@w3.org This is feedback on a Last Call Working Draft: Evaluation and Report Language (EARL) 1.0 Schema W3C Working Draft 10 May 2011 http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-EARL10-Schema-20110510/ There are no terms in the present RDF/XML schema clearly expressing the persistence policy of the terms within the vocabulary. It is also out of date in the information that it does have. In other words, the schema is presently experimental. It is not even yet into CR, meaning that people should be implementing it. Anybody using the vocabulary at the moment ought to be made aware that they are using an unstable experiment. There are vocabularies for annotating schema with this sort of information, and they should be used. The information that is present is as follows: <owl:versionInfo xml:lang="en">Editor's Working Draft 10 June 2009</owl:versionInfo> — http://www.w3.org/ns/earl Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 22:46:43 GMT Content-Location: earl.rdf Last-Modified: Mon, 09 May 2011 14:14:18 GMT ETag: "34fc-4a2d8747fa280;4a2d8749e2700" Content-Length: 13564 Expires: Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:43 GMT Content-Type: application/rdf+xml; qs=0.9 Obviously this is out of date. I'm not sure what the cutting edge vocabularies are for expressing vocabulary control. OWL silently but famously deprecated their owl:deprecated property: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2011Apr/0185.html The FOAF specification: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/ Seems to use this: http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/ns Which is perhaps as good as any. This is an important procedural bug and should be fixed with priority. It's a bit like releasing a Working Draft accidentally using the W3C Recommendation livery. People respect the w3.org/ns namespace, and need to be informed when it isn't reliable. -- Sean B. Palmer, http://inamidst.com/sbp/
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 22:51:58 UTC