Re: Question about the On Linking Alternative Representations TAG Finding

The intent of the original finding was to define best practices
in this space. If what we put together as a result of this thread
improves on what advice we can give the Web community, that will
help carry the goal of the original finding further.

Richard Cyganiak writes:
 > Ted,
 > 
 > The whole argument is sort of scattered through the thread and I'm not  
 > sure (doubt, actually) if all disagreements were resolved.
 > 
 > I suggest that if you want to take this forward, then you should draft  
 > something (bullet points at least), put it online somewhere and ask  
 > for comments.
 > 
 > I think a key points is that the document needs to make clear what it  
 > is trying to achieve. A clarification of Web architecture? A  
 > recommendation how to solve a particular problem using the modelling  
 > primitives of the Web/HTTP? What are the technical requirements for a  
 > solution?
 > 
 > It is also important to be extra-clear with terminology, as we have  
 > seen in the thread. For best results, include a glossary ;-)
 > 
 > Best,
 > Richard
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > On 18 Aug 2008, at 15:52, Ted Thibodeau Jr wrote:
 > 
 > > * On 2008/08/11 04:18 PM -0400, I wrote:
 > >> Several thoughts.
 > >
 > > ... which I've ellided here.
 > >
 > > Richard, all, I need to check -- was what I said clear?
 > >
 > > Did it resolve the points of contention and confusion?
 > >
 > > Are we now in agreement as to how alternative representations and
 > > resources are interrelated, and how con-neg is supposed to work?
 > >
 > > Can we now take that agreement and resolution back to LOD and the  
 > > other
 > > discussion arenas where confusion remains?
 > >
 > > I think reference back to the www-tag thread archive, along with a  
 > > brief
 > > summary (can we agree that the bullet points of my last post are a  
 > > good
 > > summary?), would be good to share in those other spaces.
 > >
 > > If points of confusion or disagreement remain, the conversation should
 > > probably continue ... but I hope that is not necessary at this point.
 > >
 > > Be seeing you,
 > >
 > > Ted
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > -- 
 > > A: Yes.                      http://www.guckes.net/faq/ 
 > > attribution.html
 > > | Q: Are you sure?
 > > | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 > > | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
 > >
 > > Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900  
 > > x32
 > > Evangelism & Support         //         
 > > mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
 > > OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http:// 
 > > www.openlinksw.com/
 > >                                 http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/uda/
 > > OpenLink Blogs              http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/ 
 > > virtuoso/
 > >                               http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/
 > >    Universal Data Access and Virtual Database Technology Providers

-- 
Best Regards,
--raman

Title:  Research Scientist      
Email:  raman@google.com
WWW:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/
Google: tv+raman 
GTalk:  raman@google.com, tv.raman.tv@gmail.com
PGP:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/raman-almaden.asc

Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 16:00:18 UTC