- From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:46:17 +0000
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
I don't recall saying anything about implementation experience in a telecon, but I did state at the editors meeting that I doubt if structure sharing would be problematic for implementations, that it would probably involve extra work to check that no such sharing was taking place, and that I doubt if many implementors would bother with such a check. Sean and Raphael will be in a better position than me to confirm if this is really the case, e.g., in the species validator. The problem with structure sharing would be finding the resource to change S&AS (changes could be quite significant). Ian On March 25, Dan Connolly writes: > > Ian, Sean, Raphael, Jean-François, and everybody, > > In one of the recent telcons, 13 or 20 March, > I'm not sure which, I think Ian mentioned some > implementation experience, or at least design sketch, > relevant to the bnode structure sharing (B1, B2) stuff. > > I thought I heard that species validation would be > more difficult if structure sharing were part of > the design. > > Would you please elaborate? > > I realize the issue is closed, but I think supplementing > the telcon records with relevant information is in order. > > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ >
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2003 13:45:44 UTC