- From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:21:39 -0700
- To: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABevsUGtLDZ1Amzt0Q0SXt+b1xXN6-1oaF-zFq1r6cbMTTnRsA@mail.gmail.com>
Spoke too soon. Example 14 should have <advisors/bob> and <advisors/marsha> in the last two lines. Rob On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks for the fixes John! I've gone through all the examples and I'm > pretty confident they all say what is intended now. As below, I agree that > they weren't invalid, just highly unintuitive. > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 5:32 AM, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote: > >> Short version: I agree, and good catch. For others: these comments are >> about ** LDP **, not BP&G as the only LDP citation might lead you to think >> (as I did on a quick triage skim the first time). > > > Sorry, yes, that was entirely unclear! > > Long version, lest Alexandrei et al. think I've been replaced by a pod >> person: >> >> - Strictly speaking, I don't think we can say from the outside that >> they're wrong. >> > Apologies, yes, the example taken by itself is not invalid, just > misleading in context. > > - As a WG member playing the role of server, I think our intent is to be >> clear not tricksy, and in that sense I assert they're wrong. As I read you >> to be doing. >> > Indeed :) > > Rob > -- > Rob Sanderson > Technology Collaboration Facilitator > Digital Library Systems and Services > Stanford, CA 94305 > -- Rob Sanderson Technology Collaboration Facilitator Digital Library Systems and Services Stanford, CA 94305
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 23:22:06 UTC