W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2009

Re: Proposed comment about CURIEs

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 17:08:50 +0100
Message-Id: <3AA32F43-17A2-42F4-A3C2-316193D7B8F7@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

Thanks for doing this. I'm pretty fine with most of the text, but I  
have a concern with one part below.

On 3 Apr 2009, at 16:57, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> I (Bijan) would like to add that for a long time I, and everyone I  
> was talking with, thought that you *couldn't* further restrict the  
> syntax of CURIEs. The liberalizing sentence occurs *10* paragraphs  
> after the CURIE grammar! Those 10 paragraphs are a mismash of  
> things about the *syntax* of CURIEs and things about the *host  
> language*. We strongly recommend rewriting that section with (at  
> least) two headings "further syntactic stuff" and "host language  
> issues"
> Actually, just move the stuff on host language issues into, you  
> know, the section on "Incorporating CURIEs into Host Languages",  
> make that section informative, and kill all the examples (or move  
> them to, y'know, an examples section). While you're at it, merge  
> "usage" into examples as well.
> C'mon! This is supposed to be a SPECIFICATION and most of it is  
> random blathering and examples. The conformance section is a JOKE  
> and the normative section, for all its brevity, is a disaster to  
> read. Write the spec. Make it tight. And give us a clear pointer to  
> the part we're supposed to USE, please.

While I understand and sympathize with your frustration, I don't  
think it's productive or helpful to include this in the official WG  
response. Instead, we might take the specific editorial  
recommendations and sanitize their expression. E.g.,

"""EDITORIAL NOTE: Many of us found the organization of the spec, and  
especially of the normative parts, very confusing. We suggest that  
"Usage" and "Examples" be consolidated, and that there are two  
normative sections, "Syntax" and "Incorporating CURIEs into Host  
Languages" which contain the respective constraints. The second  
section could usefully be broken down into "XML host languages" and  
"Non-XML host languages"."""

Again, thanks for doing this

The Other Bijan.
Received on Friday, 3 April 2009 16:20:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:41:58 UTC