Re: Comments on draft "baseline" httprange-14 replacement

On 2/17/12 10:42 AM, David Booth wrote:
> Jonathan,
>
> Review of: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/uddp/
>
> I started a detailed review of this document yesterday, but
> today I see that it has substantially changed.  Since you
> previously stated that your call for change proposals would
> be opened TODAY, I think it is quite unreasonable to give this
> document so little review time before it is frozen.
>
> Overall, this document is NOT yet ready for use as a baseline
> for httpRange-14 change proposals:
>
>   - As a baseline, this document should
> faithfully convey the intent of the existing httpRange-14
> resolution.  But it currently goes far beyond this, often
> including positions based on personal opinion that have no
> basis in the existing httpRange-14 decision.
>
>   - As pointed out by multiple people, the document strays
> into the murky tar pit of talking about the "meaning" of
> a URI.  This is a major tactical error.  It is unnecessary,
> and IMO reflects a persistent misunderstanding of semantic web
> architecture (which never should have been called "semantic"
> in the first place, as that term has led to no end of confusion
> and misconception).  Regarding "meaning" the rule should be
> simple: DON'T GO THERE.
>
>   - The document invents cumbersome terminology
> in an effort to be precise, rather than using well-established
> existing terms and clarifying those terms where necessary.
> This makes the document hard to read.
>
> I will try to follow up with more detailed comments, but wanted
> to get this out before today's deadline.
>
>
+1

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen