- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:07:31 -0500
- To: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 10:33 -0400, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Dan Connolly wrote: > > > I would rather not use that part of the OWL test process. > > > > The URI of a test is an integral part of the test, especially > > for EARL reporting purposes. If you move the test in URI space, > > you modify it substantially, such that at least *my* approval > > of it is void, and I think the WG's approval of it should be > > void. > > I don't see how simply moving the URI of a test (consistently) voids the > approval, especially if the change is to the URI *only*. I.e., consider > if as part of the test we calculate a checksum of some kind for the source > document. If we move the URI, but the checksum is the same, is it really useful to > consider it a different test? yes. All the RDF statements made about some URI don't apply to some other URI. You can layer relative path conventions on top, but that's an expense I'd rather not take on. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 15:07:52 UTC