- From: Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:56:04 -0400
- To: Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>
- Cc: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOUJ7Jq+xj3+puPRCVJxnkupM9hFYGRtHi32LAPMt=gydWT+gQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>wrote: > El 22/07/13 14:57, Steve Speicher escribió: > >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Pierre-Antoine Champin >> <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.**cnrs.fr<pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr> >> <mailto:pierre-antoine.**champin@liris.cnrs.fr<pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>>> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Steve, >> >> here is my review of the editor's draft. >> >> Unfortunately, I won't be on the call next monday to discuss it, but >> I'll try to check my mail if you have any comment/question. >> >> pa >> >> >> ... snip ... >> >> Sec 4.2 LDPR - HTTP GET >> >> * 4.2.3 : MUST was supposed to be replaced by SHOULD according to >> the resolution of https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/**track/issues/53<https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/53> >> >> >> Made this change (note the section is 4.2.2) as it affects a normative >> statement. Good catch, thanks >> >> ISSUE-53 4.2.2 changed MUST to SHOULD >> > > Hi, > > Does this also propagate to the MUST in 4.2.3? > > "4.2.3 LDPR servers MAY provide representations of the requested LDPR > beyond those necessary to conform to this specification, using standard > HTTP content negotiation. If the client does not indicate a preference, > text/turtle MUST be returned." > I guess by you asking the question you believe it does change this MUST into a SHOULD as well? Looking at the intent of ISSUE-53 again, it is about appealing to some agents and servers that want to appeal to */* as meaning/wanting text/html instead of text/turtle. So in that context, I would say that 4.2.3 where it states: "If the client does not indicate a preference, text/turtle MUST be returned." needs to change to: "If the client does not indicate a preference, text/turtle SHOULD be returned." Any objections to this? - Steve Speicher > > Kind regards, > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com >> <mailto:sspeiche@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> In today's teleconference we agreed that we declared the latest >> working draft [1] as ready for immediate review. The idea is to >> gather enough feedback by next Monday (July 22nd) to make a >> decision on going to Last Call. We also have published a >> vocabulary document [2] and HTML diff (from March 7th 2nd PWD) >> [3]. >> >> The editors are still tweaking a few things but most items have >> been completed. The sooner that feedback is given the better, >> if the editors receive a large number of comments late...we may >> not be able to process in a timely way. >> >> [1] - https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/**raw-file/default/ldp.html<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html> >> [2] - https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/**raw-file/default/ldp.ttl<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.ttl> >> [3] - >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/**raw-file/default/ldp-diff-** >> 20130715.html<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp-diff-20130715.html> >> >> - Steve Speicher >> >> >> >> > > -- > > Dr. Raúl García Castro > http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/**~rgarcia/<http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/~rgarcia/> > > Ontology Engineering Group > Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial > Universidad Politécnica de Madrid > Campus de Montegancedo, s/n - Boadilla del Monte - 28660 Madrid > Phone: +34 91 336 36 70 - Fax: +34 91 352 48 19 >
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 13:56:31 UTC