Re: review of Document Overview

Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>>>> 2.4/ Profiles:
>>>>> Remove Figure 2, as it serves no useful purpose.
>> I'm baffled as to what purpose you think this figure serves and why  
>> its loss will be mourned. AFAICT, the information content of the  
>> figure is:
>> ...
> 
> It's not intended to provide additional information; it's about
> presentation.  It's intended to make the relationship between the
> profiles feel as simple as it actually is.  A simple-looking diagram
> conveys that feeling much more effectively, I think, than the text.
> 
> But perhaps that's just me, so I'm okay with letting it go until/unless
> others speak up for it.
>

I have been looking at the flood of mails on one single diagram, gave
some thinking and, after all, I decided to speak up for it, too
(although, I must admit, I was not sure about it for a while).

I think that the argument on whether the diagram gives additional
information or not is besides the point. Obviously it does not, just as
none of the diagrams do either in this document or the others, except
for the 'official' UML diagrams. But let us accept the fact that for
many people a diagram helps in understanding things, relationships and
makes it easier to follow than a succinct (though precise) text. (I am
certainly one of those, after all, I spent most of my research years in
computer graphics and visualization and not in web technologies.) I
would actually be pleased to have _more_ diagrams in the spec documents,
too, even if they would not add any new information and therefore would
not serve a useful purpose specification wise.

If this diagram is not _false_ (which I do not think it is the case), I
would propose to leave it in. It does not harm, and it may help. What is
the big deal?

Ivan

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf