Re: Gloss standard terminology for resource/representation (ISSUE-81 Change Proposal)

On Apr 6, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Dan Connolly wrote:
>>
>> This is informed by discussion with lots of people, but nobody else  
>> has
>> looked at it, so it's just from me.
>>
>> I understand proposals were due January 16, 2010; I hope this  
>> proposal
>> will get some consideration even though it's late.
>
> Just out of interest, is there any particular reason why the proposal
> explicitly calls out the HTTP and URI specs rather than focusing on
> consistency with other W3C specs?

What practical difference would it make to focus on consistency with  
other W3C specs? It seems to me that the proposal identifies the  
difference in usage with protocol specs, but leaves the actual  
terminology in the bulk of the spec as it was (i.e. more consistent  
with other W3C specs).

Regards,
Maciej

Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 18:06:04 UTC