- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:52:47 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 04/06/13 18:28, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> D3.   We document this stuff instead in a WG NOTE, and rdf-concepts
> mentions it briefly
Sandro,
I thought this was what the WG was already doing via the note you were
developing content for.
As I recall (hoped?), it was going to capture the following patterns of
usage:
1/ Graph label as proper denoting names
    (httpRange-14!)
2/ Graph label is taken from the original location
    (discuss the issue with getting stuff twice;
     events pattern; relationship to (1))
(other patterns??)
and also note:
X/ Unspecified labelling and the limitation of publishing.
> D5.   The WG ignores this stuff, and some rebel band (just me, if
> necessary) publishes it as a Semantic Web IG NOTE or a Team
> Submission or even some non-W3C document.
If the D3 doc outlines the space of issues then the D5 doc can take a
strong position (and not be on the WG critical path [*]).
	Andy
[*]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Rdf-extension.html
~ 20 telecons to go, maximum 30 to end of WG including CR and PR time.
PR 2013-09-01 => ~12 telecons to go inc. comments handling but that's 
looking unlikely.
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 07:53:22 UTC