W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2004

Re: review of RDF Core documents

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 16:57:20 -0500
Message-ID: <4026B0C0.2060700@acm.org>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: em@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org


The reason I mentioned the "normative" business was that at one point 
the second sentence in the SOTD of the documents said "It is a stable 
document and may be used as reference material or cited as a normative 
reference from another document."  (This seems to be standard 
boilerplate for other W3C normative specifications as well.)  There was 
also a statement above that for translations that said that the English 
translation was the normative one.  I think these sentences were removed 
as a result of my pointing out that the Primer wasn't normative. 
However, it seems to me that they *are* appropriate for the other 
documents.  However, it's really not a big concern to me.  I was just 
pointing out that some changes that were appropriate for the Primer 
seemed to be carried over to the other documents as well, and I wondered 
whether that was intentional.


Sandro Hawke wrote:

> Thanks for the careful review, Frank.
> As I understand the process, these kinds of changes are made (at this
> point, after PR) at the discretion of the Director, rather than by WG
> decision.  However, it would be good to know if anyone on the WG sees
> any problem with any of these changes.  They all seem good to me,
> except the idea that the SOTD should say something about normativity.
> As I understand it, to the extent that normativity is conveyed
> explicitely, it should be in the document main text, or in
> parenthetical expressions on the section titles.  And that kind of
> change is potentially substantive, and so not appropriate here and
> now.
Received on Sunday, 8 February 2004 16:56:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:27 UTC