- From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:13:41 -0400
- To: ext Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-ws-policy@w3.org
My preference is to define the terms that are needed in the Framework in the Framework document, then additional terms needed in Attachments in that document. Add note to Attachments that other terms associated with Framework are defined in that document. This was suggested at F2F, seems logical. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Jul 13, 2006, at 1:31 PM, ext Felix Sasaki wrote: > Title - Clarify the relation of overlapping definitions in the > framework > / in the attachement document. > > Description - > > We should clarify the relation of overlapping definitions in the > framework / in the attachement document. > > Justification - > > Some terms are defined in both documents, see [1] and [2]. People who > want to normatively reference these terms should have only one target. > > > Target - > > The sections at [1] and [2]. > > Proposal - > > I see two possibilities: > a) Have the term definitions as they are, but adding to one of them a > statement like "the normative reference for this definition is at > xxx". > "xxx" points to the target definition in the other document. > b) Have the overlapping definitions only in one document, and pointers > in the other. > > I have no preference for a) or b). > > > [1] > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy- > framework.html#Terminology > [2] > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy- > attachement.html#Glossary > > > Felix
Received on Friday, 14 July 2006 20:14:17 UTC