- From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:17:22 -0500
- To: "public-sml@w3.org" <public-sml@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF887B1AEB.0AF6E3EA-ON85257507.005308BF-85257507.0053FC9E@us.ibm.com>
Hmm... my reading of certainly seems to be 1 doc/nsURI [section 2] In all Member and Team Submissions: 1. Namespace URIs MUST be dereferenceable, and 2. Namespace Documents MUST describe the relationship between the defining specification and the namespace URI [section 3] A Namespace Document describes the namespace, providing directly or by reference information for human and also, ideally, machine consumption. A Namespace Document is available for retrieval using a corresponding namespace URI. Note section 2 says each nsURI must be dereferenceable (a bit obtusely because it mixes singular and plural), section 3 says document (singular) describes ns (singular). At the bottom of the page there is a mechanism to submit comments, if the users of the document cannot figure it out that seems like pretty good reason to comment (and, following our own editorial "good practices", that means drafting a replacement they can start from). Unless the working group feels those comments need to be vetted by the wg, I personally would be fine if someone chose to submit comments on their own behalf... we can discuss later today if anyone feels the need. If you want a "what is normal practice" read Kumar, you might ask Jules. If we are contemplating sending the NS documents with the CR draft, he probably would feel better knowing about their arrival beforehand. (Although, if we did send the draft on 11/18, I'm now talking about the past using future tense, what would Ford Prefect say?) Best Regards, John Street address: 2455 South Road, P328 Poughkeepsie, NY USA 12601 Voice: 1+845-435-9470 Fax: 1+845-432-9787 From: Kumar Pandit <kumarp@windows.microsoft.com> To: Len Charest <Len.Charest@microsoft.com>, "public-sml@w3.org" <public-sml@w3.org> Date: 11/18/2008 03:18 PM Subject: RE: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF Good question. It is not clear from the w3c guidelines whether we need 3 or just 1 policy doc. -----Original Message----- From: Len Charest Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:16 AM To: Kumar Pandit; public-sml@w3.org Subject: RE: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF Point of clarification: Since the specs collectively define 3 namespaces, shouldn't we provide 3 namespace documents - one per namespace? -Len From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kumar Pandit Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 10:14 PM To: public-sml@w3.org Cc: Kumar Pandit Subject: namespace policy for SML/SML-IF Here is the namespace policy for SML & SML-IF. I drafted it based on example 2 in section 4 of http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri. Please take a look and send your feedback by eod Tuesday 11/18. We are planning to send the CR draft to the webmaster on Tue 11/18. I think we may also want to send the namespace policy document along with it. Kumar ===== SML and SML-IF Namespace Policy The SML and SML-IF specifications define the following namespaces. 1. http://www.w3.org/ns/sml 2. http://www.w3.org/ns/sml-function 3. http://www.w3.org/ns/sml-if The namespace URIs use the http://www.w3.org/ns/ssss format as recommended in section 1 of the URIs for W3C Namespaces document. Names in the namespaces listed above are defined in version 1.1 of SML and SML-IF specifications, and may also be defined in future versions of the two specifications. The specifications define language extension mechanisms and how to handle changes such as the addition of new terms to the language. W3C reserves the right to determine which changes (backward compatible or not) are in the interest of the community at large.
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2008 15:18:03 UTC