Re: Alternatives to containers/collections (was Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0")

2010/1/15 Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>:

> Ok, so this sounds to me just like vanilla deprecation, I don't see anything
> going on "quietly" here.
>
> I just asked, because I remembered having seen this term "quiet deprecation"
> more than once being used in this thread, and I wondered whether there is
> something important that I have missed.

The "quiet" bit, as far as I'd put it, would be for there to be no
formal statement of deprecation, simply that the person using the spec
wouldn't find the feature unless they digged deep - after they'd found
a better solution.

Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 17:26:48 UTC