W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webid@w3.org > February 2013

Re: opening issue-74 - Re: (Dis)Proving that 303s have a performance impact.

From: Mo McRoberts <Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:38:52 +0000
To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
CC: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "<public-webid@w3.org>" <public-webid@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8642F235-263B-4DD9-ABED-D27174B5129F@bbc.co.uk>
In which case, I'd propose raising something which results in the following vote (or even straw poll?) in order to settle this:

“Is it likely to be helpful to some readers of the spec to include a short note to explain the purpose of hash URIs in the examples, or is it likely to be otherwise confusing?”

If the answer to that is 'the former', then we can look at tweaking the wording.

M.

On Mon 2013-Feb-18, at 16:21, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
wrote:

>
> On 18 Feb 2013, at 17:07, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/18/13 10:58 AM, Mo McRoberts wrote:
>>> On Mon 2013-Feb-18, at 15:24, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> To advance things, it may — as you suggested previously, Kingsley — put that to a vote, though it is worth noting that when you wrote [2] it wasn't especially clear what should be voted on except the exact words as written by Andrei, which wouldn't have been at all helpful.
>>
>> All I wanted was a vote on the notice. Keep it or remove it.
>
> There is a process to get to a vote:
>
> 1. raise an issue
> 2. people discuss it,
> 3. if it is felt it is worth it, the issue can get opened
> 4. This may lead to more discussion and a vote.
>
> Currently you raised ISSUE-74 [1], whose title is the not so clear
> "revised WebID definition must be flowed through conceptual spec,
> removing hashURI specificity"
>
> The title is not so clear, but I there is a citation from you
> that leads me to think it is related to this issue.
>
> [[
> As Kingsley says, "This note is simply unnecessary. All the examples are based on hash URIs (as decided by the WG) which has the desired effect of encouraging the use of hash-based HTTP URIs."
> ]]
>
> There is no question of voting in that issue.
>
> This Friday we can open the issue, it is on the Agenda.
> (Though I think a better title would be helpful)
>
> I think we have had the input from pretty much everybody too on this now.
>
> So I hope we'll see all of you there.
>
> Henry
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/74

--
Mo McRoberts - Technical Lead - The Space
0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E,
Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, Pacific Quay, Glasgow, G51 1DA
Project Office: Room 7083, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ

--
Mo McRoberts - Technical Lead - The Space
0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E,
Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, Pacific Quay, Glasgow, G51 1DA
Project Office: Room 7083, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ



-----------------------------
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in
error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to
this.
-----------------------------
Received on Monday, 18 February 2013 16:39:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:05:49 UTC