Last thing before LC (was: Re: a few more editorial comments)

Last things before LC:

In the RIF teleconf, we just had approved to drop former "At risk issue 
1" about the rtfn: namespace. Lacking alternative proposals, we think 
that the only viable solution at this point is going with our own 
namespace, especially for the extractor functions.

We left in at risk feature 1 and 2 (formerly 2 and 3) and the group 
seemed to agree that the doc can go to LC from that.

Given feedback on rtfn:compare and rtfn:length (which we should probably 
solicit explicitly in the official announcement) we may decide whether 
to leave or drop them for the final document.

Axel

Boris Motik wrote:
> Hello,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-rdf-text-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-text-request@w3.org]
>> On Behalf Of Sandro Hawke
>> Sent: 07 April 2009 15:16
>> To: public-rdf-text@w3.org
>> Subject: a few more editorial comments
>>
>>
>> A few more:
>>
>>    *  in At Risk #3, I think you mean "rtfn:length" not "rdfn:compare"
>>
> 
> Oops, sorry! I've fixed this.
> 
>>    *  in At Risk #1, I don't quite understand what's at risk.  Is it the
>> choice
>>       of namespaces?   Do you mean:
>>
>>             "The selection of the rtfn
>>             (http://www.w3.org/2009/rdf-text-functions) namespace
>>             may change, based on feedback that these functions should
>>             be merged into another namespace"
>>
>>       That seems kind of problematic, since it's not a binary choice.
>>       What is it that you think might change?   What might it change to?
>>
> 
> I've changed the text to this:
> 
> The selection of the rtfn: (http://www.w3.org/2009/rdf-text-functions) prefix
> for the functions may change if community feedback suggests that a different
> prefix should be used.
> 
> As for the alternatives, I believe RIF should answer that.
> 
>>    *  In the intro:
>>         > Furthermore, typed rdf:text literals that are semantically
>>                                                ^^^^  remove
>>
> 
> Oops, sorry!
> 
>> Great work, guys.
>>
>>    -- Sandro
> 
> I'm glad you like it! I am also quite happy with that the document turned out to
> be.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 	Boris
> 
> 


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2009 16:40:04 UTC