Re: Weak vs Full RDF 1.2 conformance

Funny, but no. We are aiming at an actual standard, so calling anything “experimental” will not fly.

Ora


From: Thomas Lörtsch <tl@rat.io>
Date: Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 8:45 AM
To: "public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>, "Lassila, Ora" <ora@amazon.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Cc: "public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]Weak vs Full RDF 1.2 conformance


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.


"experimental".
Am 16. Februar 2023 14:35:10 MEZ schrieb "Lassila, Ora" <ora@amazon.com>:
I like that term (“classic”), but what would replace “strong”?

Ora


From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 8:29 AM
To: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Cc: "public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>, "Lassila, Ora" <ora@amazon.com>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]Weak vs Full RDF 1.2 conformance
Resent-From: <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 8:29 AM


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.



Is there a way to call it "classic" rather than "weak"?

On Thu, 16 Feb 2023, 13:16 Antoine Zimmermann, <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr<mailto:antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>> wrote:
I added a comment to the Github issue on proposing 2 types of
conformance. Please check this if you are interested by the topic:

https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/19#issuecomment-1433072504


I propose 2 options that we can discuss today.
--
Antoine Zimmermann
École des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
CS 62362
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 49 97 02
http://www.emse.fr/~zimmermann/