- From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:33:30 +0100
- To: "andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
As for marking the old specs as outdated, we should IMO follow the example of OWL, see yellow box in for instance http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/ We could do the same with a link to our sparql11-overview doc. Best, Axel > -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Seaborne [mailto:andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com] > Sent: Donnerstag, 10. Jänner 2013 10:25 > To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > Subject: Re: draft response TH-1 and suggest to remove > www.w3.org/TR/sprot11/sparql-protocol-query-11.wsdl > > > > On 10/01/13 09:13, Polleres, Axel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am trying to close the last comments and have quickly drafted a > > response on TH-1: > > > > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:TH-1 > > +1 > > > One question in this context, mostly @team: > > > > Shouldn't we remove > > www.w3.org/TR/sprot11/sparql-protocol-query-11.wsdl > > <http://www.w3.org/TR/sprot11/sparql-protocol-query-11.wsdl> as it is > > no longer part of the official spec? > > > > Maybe we can do that along the upcoming publication round. > > Remove or return HTML to say "it's dead" -- at the very least update > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/ to say "it's dead" > > and generally - how do old specs get made so that users will not be confused > inot thinking they are current?) > > Ditto TR/rdf-sparql-query/ > > Andy > > > > > Best, > > > > Axel > > > > > > Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Österreich > > CT RTC BAM CON-AT > > Siemensstraße 90 > > 1210 Wien, Österreich > > Tel.: +43 51707-36983 > > Mobil: +43 664 88550859 > > mailto:axel.polleres@siemens.com > > > > Firma: Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Österreich; Rechtsform: > > Aktiengesellschaft; Firmensitz: Wien; Firmenbuchnummer: FN 60562 m; > > Firmenbuchgericht: Handelsgericht Wien; DVR: 0001708 > >
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2013 09:34:13 UTC