- From: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 23:34:39 +0200
- To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>
> I think that's a little unfair, Raphaël. The decision to have a common > base name was discussed at length at the F2F, during the session set > aside for SSN. What that common base name is, and what the prefixes > might be, are up for discussion - which is what this thread is about. > Kerry is trying to offer a straightforward choice but at this stage, the > door is open to alternative suffixes. I originally understood that only the SSN task members did vote during the F2F meeting, my mistake if this was not the case. Room is open for alternative suffixes or separators, but the window is closed regarding the fact that the core module and the extended must be sub-string, correct? Raphaël -- Raphaël Troncy EURECOM, Campus SophiaTech Data Science Department 450 route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France. e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
Received on Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:35:13 UTC