- From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 13:01:39 -0700
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF97FC33D7.B6AAAD40-ON88257C00.006D9F86-88257C00.006E0409@us.ibm.com>
Hey folks, I put a doodle poll in place to gather opinion on the possible changes to membership related predicates and it has evidently been largely ignored. I would appreciate if you could take a few minutes to cast your vote. Thanks. -- Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group From: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS To: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, Date: 09/30/2013 11:14 AM Subject: Re: ISSUE-81 Suggested Name Changes Thanks Steve for putting the wiki page together. To help figure out where people stand on the different proposals I set up a poll: http://www.doodle.com/qf5am2pu89fcyaz2 Please, everyone, go there and vote for your favorite. Thanks. -- Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com> wrote on 09/30/2013 10:19:14 AM: > From: Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com> > To: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS, > Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org> > Date: 09/30/2013 10:20 AM > Subject: Re: ISSUE-81 Suggested Name Changes > > Hey John, > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > I moved the proposals into a Wiki page [1] so we could do some > > better side-by-side comparisons. I think we should be closed on > > what the proposals are, there are a few questions I put inline with > > some of the proposals (Miguel's and Ted's) > The questions don't leap out... I search for "?" to find them then? > I was not sure if those were from you vs others/authors in the > original threads. > > I called out the names, so I thought that would have been enough for > those authors to find. > Do we need a column for the combination of inverse predicate and > member object (foaf:primaryTopic example) ? 5.2.10 pretty much says > it's allowed, although we've never discussed it that I can recall... > no doubt a simple consequence of "unless we prohibit it, > independently specified features can be used together". > I thought about it but the page was already getting pretty wide. We > can easily scroll though. Will do if you think it will help. > > - Steve Speicher > > Best Regards, John > > Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages > Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2013 20:02:12 UTC