W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > February 2008

Re: extra comments on test cases

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 13:11:04 +0100
Message-ID: <47B18CD8.9070802@w3.org>
To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
CC: ben@adida.net, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

again, please to dot argue with me:-). Let us make it simple: the group 
has to approve that test case. It hasn't yet.


Mark Birbeck wrote:
> Hi Ivan,
>> [snip]
>> Which shows that there is _no_ unanimity of opinion in the group on the
>> interpretation of [_:] (I merely reacted on that mail). Ie, the group
>> has to give its amen to what you proposed (note that the test cases I
>> submitted went along your interpretation so do not argue with me:-)
> Yes, I know that's what you are referring to! :) But there is NOTHING
> in the spec that could give this interpretation. I thought that RDFa
> would do my washing for me...does that mean the group is no longer
> unanimous, and that we should vote on that, too?
> :)
> Ok...I'm being facetious, but the serious point is that I really don't
> know what you are asking 'the group' to vote on, and it's taking up
> time that could be better spent on other things.
> All of us, at various times, might have had some uncertainty about
> something in the spec. But we can't open up debates and have votes
> each time that happens, unless someone can point to some place in the
> spec that has created a genuine ambiguity. Obviously if there is a
> resolution in a past meeting that says we decided to go this way with
> bnodes, then there is an issue to resolve, and the error is mine for
> not adding the functionality to the spec.
> But if neither of these two conditions hold--spec ambiguity or
> unfulfilled resolution--I really don't see what it is that you think
> the group should be voting on.
> (And the reason I doubt there is such a resolution, is that I proposed
> CURIEs in the first place, and I always did so as a simple string
> substitution mechanism; I would have definitely noticed if at any
> point there was a change to introduce 'intelligence' into the
> mechanism. I would have also noticed if changes were proposed and
> agreed that took CURIEs out of line with Turtle and N3, since that was
> a key design goal of mine.)
> Regards,
> Mark


Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2008 12:11:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:55 UTC