- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 16:36:27 +0200
- To: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>, Alistair Miles <alimanfoo@googlemail.com>, SWD Working Group <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi everyone, All this seems good to me. I would have however been slightly more comfortable with the HTML document(ation) giving the explanations that are currently in Appendix C. Especially, I liked the idea of being able to access the RDF (withouth conneg) quite quickly from the HTML. If linking directly to the RDF in the HTML document is judged not to be elegant, I think that at least the link to the SKOS Reference in this HTML document should point directly to Appendix C, and appendix C be added with a link to the RDF/XML file (without conneg). Would that be ok? I don't think the latter solution implies a big change... As a side remark, I am fully happy with the "informative/normative" wording, which I think mirrors what I had in mind at some point in this thread :-) About the branding of (SKOS+/-)XL: currently the Primer includes some XL and SKOS+XL, in accordance with the previous version of the Reference. But I'll be happy to change that to SKOS-XL! Cheers, Antoine > > On 15 May 2009, at 09:54, Thomas Baker wrote: > >> [...] >> >> Appendix B. SKOS Properties and Classes >> >> -- If one accepts all the changes above, one ends up with: >> >> Appendix A. SKOS eXtension for Labels (XL) >> Appendix B. SKOS Properties and Classes >> Appendix C. SKOS and XL Namespace Documents >> Appendix D. SKOS Namespace: a historical note >> >> I think it would be slightly clearer, however, if the >> order of A and B were switched: >> >> Appendix A. SKOS Properties and Classes >> Appendix B. SKOS eXtension for Labels (XL) >> Appendix C. SKOS and XL Namespace Documents >> Appendix D. SKOS Namespace: a historical note >> >> That way, the _non-optional_ SKOS properties and classes are >> presented before the _optional_ XL properties and classes. >> This order (SKOS first, followed by SKOS XL) is then mirrored >> in Appendix C (SKOS and XL Namespace Documents). > > This all seems sensible and at the level of "editorial changes". If I > hear no arguments against, I'll enact these (probably next week). > >> -- A small branding issue: Currently, SKOS Reference refers to >> SKOS-XL simply as "XL" or "SKOS+XL" (in the context of >> A.3.4.2. Labeling Integrity). Informally, we have been >> referring to it as "SKOS-XL" (see change section). Do we >> want to promote a consistent way to refer to SKOS XL? >> Currently, SKOS Reference implies that people should refer to >> it simply as "XL". I would prefer that we change these >> references "XL" into "SKOS-XL", "SKOS+XL", or "SKOS XL" in >> [1], [5], and in the RDF schema for SKOS-XL. For example: >> >> Appendix B. SKOS eXtension for Labels (SKOS-XL) >> Appendix C. SKOS and SKOS-XL Namespace Documents >> >> As a counterargument to my suggestion, I see a slight potential >> for confusion as to whether "SKOS-XL" means "SKOS plus XL" or >> just the "XL extension to SKOS". Having noted the issue, I am >> happy to drop this suggestion if others are happy with continuing >> to call it just "XL". > > I'd propose SKOS-XL. This is the namespace that's currently used in the > schema. > >> -- I note that in [2], some "[CITE]" references still need to be >> filled in. > > Ok. > >> -- In Appendix C, links to the documents needed to be added in C.1, >> C.2, and C.3. In C.2, a clickable link could also be >> added to the words "by citing its URI". > > Ok. > > Sean > > -- > Sean Bechhofer > School of Computer Science > University of Manchester > sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk > http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer > > > > >
Received on Saturday, 16 May 2009 14:37:28 UTC