- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:06:43 -0400
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 10/19/12 10:45, Peter Patel-Schneider wrote: > I have absolutely no problem with other documents about JSON-LD that > don't mention RDF at all. However, if the controlling document on > JSON-LD produced by the RDF WG isn't about RDF in a very strong way, > then there is something very wrong. We keep veering into territory that is vague and non-technical. I don't understand the technical point you're making in the paragraph above, Peter. If we don't have technical specifics and areas of the spec that are being analyzed, it makes it very difficult to address the issue. To put it another way, phrases like "very strong way", "something very wrong", and "enough" place us firmly onto the "go fetch me a rock" playing field. We need /how/ one states something in a "very strong way". We need to know exactly /what/ is "very wrong". We need specifics. We need concrete spec text, or we need a concrete issue with the charter, or we need something actionable to go on. Without one of those things, we're going to transform this discussion into a perma-thread. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: HTML5 and RDFa 1.1 http://manu.sporny.org/2012/html5-and-rdfa/
Received on Friday, 19 October 2012 16:07:07 UTC