Re: LDP agenda for 24 February

On February 21, 2014 5:11:09 PM EST, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote on 02/21/2014 01:28:51 PM:
>
>> -0  Personally, I think the container/membership story is extremely 
>> problematic, and we've come around to a place where we can do much 
>> better.
>
>That's an opinion not a fact.
>

Yes, the "personally, I think" was intended to cover both clauses.  Very much opinion.

>I'm sorry if I lack enthusiasm but having been in the center of all the
>
>discussions, trying to understand everyone's opinion and use cases so I
>
>could describe them to everyone to ensure a meaningful debate toward 
>resolutions I have very little faith in the idea that anyone can come
>up 
>with a  solution that will easily get everyone's support.
>
>Rather, it seems that when people come up with "better/simpler
>solutions" 
>they do so at the cost of failing to address some of the use cases we 
>have. 
>
>>  But I'm not going to lie in the road, because:
>> 
>>      1.  We really do need to move along
>> 
>>      2.  Arnaud may be right there's nothing better nearby
>
>To clarify, I don't doubt that there are other ways to address the use 
>cases we have. What I'm saying is that I don't know that there is a
>much 
>better way that will get everyone excited. Every proposal we've seen
>has 
>had its drawbacks, which were only better for one particular set of 
>people.
>
>> 
>>      3.  Everyone can just use ldp:BasicContainer along with some 
>> new "Membership" thing, leaving the existing Membership stuff to the
>> large pile of not-quite-deprecated stuff, like RDF Reification and
>RDF 
>Bag.
>
>As I always say, anyone can make proposals. You're free to make a
>proposal 
>to the WG and see if it flies (any plans for the weekend? ;-)


Yeah, I was going to let it go until Ashok encouraged me.    Now this is my weekend plan, indeed.    


 But we're
>
>running out of time and we can't just rehash the same issues over and 
>over, and every time someone new comes to the table. It's already clear
>
>that we've lost the attention of quite a few people who got tired of
>all 
>this or just couldn't afford to put that much time into it.

Right.    In my view, this is actually the hardest thing about w3c process...   getting the right people plugged in at the right times.

   - Sandro

>--
>Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group

Received on Saturday, 22 February 2014 03:17:35 UTC