- From: Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 09:22:28 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
2009/3/5 Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>: > If NF&R has grammar productions (and I'm not happy that it has), then > there needs to be visible disclaimers that NF&R is non-normative. Is there needs to be visible disclaimers that QRG is non-normative ? Is there needs to be visible disclaimers that Profiles is non-normative ? Christine > peter > > > From: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov> > Subject: The issue of syntax productions within the NF&R document > Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:42:16 -0500 > >> >> Bijan had expressed a view [1] that including the syntax productions in >> the NF&R >> was needless duplication (my paraphrasing) of material from other >> documents. Christine >> and I have discussed this offline and here is our position. >> >> ****************************************************** >> >> We think that a description of the syntax for each feature is needed >> in the document for properly describing the features in order to >> ground all the other discussion about the feature. Without this, the >> document would not be complete. >> >> It makes the new features being discussed concrete which >> really helps in understanding for all the related discussion such as: >> - why do we have the feature >> - and the theoretical and implementation perspective on it. >> It would also be a pain for the reader to jump to the syntax document >> at each feature discussed in NF&R. >> >> We also think that the functional syntax is the best syntax for this >> purpose. First, this syntax is a good compromise of readability and >> user-friendly syntax. Furthermore, it is the syntax used in the Syntax >> document, so when the reader does go to that document for reference >> and more details, it will be a smooth transition from what he or she >> has already seen. >> >> Christine and Evan >> >> ****************************************************** >> >> >> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Feb/0261.html >> > > -- Christine
Received on Saturday, 7 March 2009 08:23:04 UTC