- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:01:59 -0600
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org, w3t-comm@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1138762919.8274.170.camel@jebediah>
On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 02:35 +0100, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > Hi, > > Regarding http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri it's sad to see the > document has not been checked for broken links before publication, > there are broken fragments that should be fixed. I found one and fixed it. Thanks for the report. > The entire section 4 does not make sense to me, I don't understand > what it could mean for a namespace to "change"; this was discussed > to quite some extend on the www-tag mailing list, it's odd to see > this still in the document. I also do not understand the relation- > ship between namespace names and validity of content or processing > semantics as implied by some examples. This text is based on discussion with TimBL and was shared with the TAG as well [1] (although I don't recall receiving feedback from them). [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2005Sep/0001 > I suggest the section is replaced with something like > > It is important that specifications clearly state expectations > about how the technology will evolve and how changes will affect > the relevant namespace names, implementations and content. > Specifications must include such information as applicable and > namespace documents should link to the relevant section of the > Technical Report. > > The current examples aren't suitable in my opinion, the document > should rather link to existing Technical Reports or namespace > documents that get this right if examples are really needed. As > such specifications would discuss this in a better context than > the policy could, this will help Working Groups to better under- > stand the requirements. I'd suggest some, but I'm afraid I don't > know of any... > > I also note that it's a bad idea to refer to "URIs" here, it should > refer to namespace names or if discussion of resource identifiers > is really needed, it should refer to IRIs. We'll keep track of your comments and let you know if we make any changes as a result. Thanks Björn, _ Ian -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2006 03:02:23 UTC