- From: Wilson, Kirk D <Kirk.Wilson@ca.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 07:55:54 -0500
- To: <public-sml@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <F9576E62032243419E097FED5F0E75F30327643E@USILMS12.ca.com>
All, Attached is the first half of a document that will (hopefully) eventually lead to a proposal on the EPR scheme. Since my views on how the so-called EPR scheme would have to work in the context of SML are somewhat radical and would change how the EPR scheme is constructed, I thought it advisable to just distribute my arguments that I think require us to take a fresh look at the whole EPR issue. Perhaps I'm totally off base here (I don't claim to be an "EPR guru" by any means), but right now I don't think that any other course is feasible. You might view the attached document as a head and torso, but no legs as yet, i.e., there's no actual proposal on the definition of the "EPR schema". (I tried to indicate where the demarcation occurs.) There's no point in going on with the "legs" unless there's agreement on the head and torso. (Where is Philippe? We really need someone from the W3C Architecture Domain to provide guidance on this issue.) (I will attach this email to the bug.) Kirk Wilson, Ph.D. CA Inc. Research Staff Member, CA Labs Intellectual Property and Standards Council of Technical Excellence Tele: + 1 603 823-7146 Fax: + 1 603 823-7148 <mailto:kirk.wilson@ca.com>
Attachments
- application/msword attachment: Proposal for the EPR scheme.doc
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2007 12:57:06 UTC