- From: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:25:52 -0500
- To: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: "gordon@gordondunsire.com" <gordon@gordondunsire.com>, public-xg-lld@w3.org, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 09:55:16AM +0100, Mark van Assem wrote: > >Yes, we need to use a terminology related as recognizably as > >possible to things already familiar to the intended reader, > >but we also need to point out to readers where perspectives > >differ. On this point, I suggest we find a way to say > >that "records" may provide descriptive statements "about" > >more than one something. > > So you could take the route that I took. First give a "familiar" / > "rough" / "generic" description and then point out the > problems/confusions with this generic view. That would work for me. Tom -- Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Received on Friday, 21 January 2011 01:26:31 UTC