Re: ORG: proposed Last Call draft for review

On 11/10/12 13:58, Phil Archer wrote:
> Agh! I really should read e-mail threads bottom up...
> Right, take 2. So now I've gone back to the wiki and put back most of
> Richard's changes. I think the wording around not using terms from other
> vocabs where this one will do is fine in Dave's version so I've kept that.
> s/declare/define/ yes.
> Requiring given formats - OK - that makes sense. Dave - do you think
> that bullet could be added to ORG (you didn't include it).

I didn't include it because Richard's suggestion came after I had frozen 
the doc for review.

I don't object to adding the bullet on formats but don't regard it as 
necessary, especially not in ORG's case.


> On 10/10/2012 08:56, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> Phil, Dave,
>> On 4 Oct 2012, at 15:59, Phil Archer wrote:
>>>> How about drafting a “boilerplate vocabulary conformance section” in
>>>> the wiki, with an eye towards using it (with variations where
>>>> appropriate) in all our vocabularies, but also with an eye towards
>>>> proposing it as something that's potentially applicable beyond GLD?
>>>> Phil, do you want to take a first stab at this wiki page?
>>> Done
>> Nice. I've tweaked it a bit. Diff here:
>> Changes:
>> * Re-phrase the bit about not using terms from other vocabularies to
>> simply say, "use terms from this vocabulary where possible"
>> * say that profiles may require specific concrete protocols, formats,
>> and syntaxes
>> * s/declare/define/
>> Plus some of Dave's wording tweaks from ORG.
>> Best,
>> Richard

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 13:34:49 UTC