RE: Recommended good practice on Namespace documents does not say "definitive"

Thank you for your comment on the WebArch document.  

I agree with you that adding the word "definitive" to this paragraph
would be very useful.

/paulc 
(speaking for himself and not the whole TAG)

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 
17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3 
Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 
mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com

  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-webarch-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webarch-
> comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Booth
> Sent: February 20, 2004 3:52 PM
> To: public-webarch-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Recommended good practice on Namespace documents does not say
> "definitive"
> 
> 
> In 4.5.4. Namespace Documents, "Good practice: Namespace documents"
> states:
> 
>          "Resource owners who publish an XML namespace name SHOULD
>          make available material intended for people to read and
>          material optimized for software agents in order to meet
>          the needs of those who will use the namespace vocabulary."
> 
> However, the term "definitive" is missing.  Was this intentional?
Based
> on
> a quick skimming of the issue, it looks like the TAG is in agreement
that
> the namespace document should directly or indirectly provide
*definitive*
> material about the namespace, but I'm not sure.
> 
> In any case, I think it is important to say that the namespace
document
> directly or indirectly provides *definitive* material about the
namespace
> vocabulary.  That would provide a clear, deterministic chain of
authority
> for determining the meaning of a newly discovered namespace-qualified
> vocabulary.
> 
> 
> --
> David Booth
> W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> Telephone: +1.617.253.1273

Received on Friday, 20 February 2004 16:54:23 UTC