- From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:10:44 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: andy.seaborne@hp.com, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <4634FAFB-29B5-4915-B3AA-C34DB432B4CF@inf.unibz.it>
On 13 Feb 2006, at 15:22, Dan Connolly wrote: >> That text (in the definition) was something that the WG made a >> decision about. >> I don't think I have license to make changes without further a >> WG decision >> (and you weren't there on Tuesday). >> >> Dan - can I apply the changes? >> Or apply them for WG review? > > It's been very difficult to get all the interested parties on this > issue in sync. I'm not inclined to re-consider our 26 Jan decision > without a really compelling argument that it's broken. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006JanMar/ > att-0298/26-dawg-minutes.html#item04 > > If this is only an editorial problem, it can get fixed during CR. > > A test case showing it's a substantive problem would be a compelling > argument to re-consider the decision. > > Andy, I'd rather you did _not_ change the decisions that we > agreed on 26 Jan. > > Enrico, I hope you find this acceptable. Not really. These are editorial problems, that make the current definition (a) slightly imprecise from the formal point of view: >>>> 1) missing explicit quantification (some term has not been properly >>>> introduced before being mentioned: B and BGP') >>>> >>>> 2) the notion of "introduced by" should be replaced by the more >>>> precise "in the range of" (b) not fully understandable: >>>> 3) we need to emphasise that G' and B are somehow fixed - so that >>>> we can ignore mentioning them from now on (as we actually do >>>> whenever we mention matching in the rest of the document). I don't see why we want to go public with an imprecise document, while we have spotted the imprecision in advance. Why should we be so rigid for an editorial problem? cheers --e.
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 19:21:33 UTC