- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 21:55:43 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
small comment ... Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>>>2) Completely Editorial: I would like the normative version of the >>>>document to be a single HTML file. I know, off hand, of no other (at >>>>least modern) W3C recommendation that is split up merely for >>>>navigational purposes. It's inconvenient, it's inconsistent even with >>>>the other OWL specs, and annoying, especially for offline reading. >>>> >>>I agree somewhat, but do find the separated version to be helpful >>>sometimes. I was asked to make the switch from a single to a compound >>>document, and I'm not particularly interested in switching back. >>> >>Er...but none of the other documents, afaik, either in webont or >>rdfcore are compound. Few if any, again afaik, modern W3C recs are >>compound. I would have thought that that would be determinative :) >> >>Not a biggy, but it does annoy me each and every time. And I often >>forget that it's compound and thus load up only the first page and find >>myself off line with not what I wanted. Oh well. Bookmarking the single >>file will work. But I predict other people's annoyance. >>[snip] >> > > No change is likely to be made here. > OWL Test is a compound doc, and so far I have only had positive feedback on that change. Weakly suggest adding "OWL Test Cases is also a compound document." (or not) Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 16:56:31 UTC