- From: Stasinos Konstantopoulos <konstant@iit.demokritos.gr>
- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 17:44:18 +0200
- To: Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>
- Cc: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>
On Wed Dec 3 14:57:43 2008 Phil Archer said: > Working through the discussion with Tim about the conformance criteria > for the formal doc has made me re-read section 5 where you've written: > > "In addition, the POWDER processor may return a triple with a u as > subject, wdrs:describedby as property, and the IRI of the POWDER > processor as object." > > That should read: > > "In addition, the POWDER processor may return a triple with a u as > subject, wdrs:describedby as property, and the IRI of the *POWDER > document* from which the description was obtained as object. If more > than one POWDER document is the source of the description then each > should be the object of a similar triple." It's fine. I also wouldn't mind clearly defining "similar": ... then each should be the object o of a separate <u> wdrs:describedby <o> . triple. > Is that going to make you go into a huff of logic? Amazingly, not. No prob, +1 from me. s
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2008 15:44:58 UTC