- From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 09:56:55 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
1 -> sounds good to me! 3 -> ok I trust this will be fixed, I won't check it! 4 -> ok I see the point now, and the mention of the sub-property pattern in your last ED http://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#profile-requirements I see this extension pattern is even mentioned in http://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#relation which is very useful. 5, 6 -> I think I will have a problem with the new pattern for constraints on assets and parties, if there's still the same "URI-hijacking" that I dislike in #162. But that's probably to be discussed in #162 or another issue, not in the ticket here. At least the new approach with constraints look less confusing about its semantics than the scope one! 2. I would like to carry on a full analysis of the ODRL/SKOS analysis and give you an answer. But this is pending the question on the semantics of the new constructs you've introduced in the context of #160. Maybe we should open a new ticket and include all the SKOS matters and then close this one? -- GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/164#issuecomment-304622802 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 29 May 2017 09:57:01 UTC