* Steve Pepper
|
| As I understand from Lars Marius, the example is to contain *no
| syntax whatever*.
* Bernard Vatant
|
| ??? Lars Marius, please expand on what you understand by that. That
| is not what I got from the meeting. But maybe I've missed something
| ...
We agreed in Montr嶧l that the existing example was bad because it
made recommendations in addition to those made in the document
itself. I also made the point that doing a full example with syntax
etc would implicitly make recommendations about syntax, even though
Deliverable #1 itself does not do this, and I thought that was a bad
idea. At the time I thought people agreed with me, but they have
actually agreed with something else. :)
| Well. Under this cryptic sentence is the fact we discussed that
| people are likely to jump to examples without reading the prose ...
| but basically I thought we were still in agreement that XHTML and
| RDF syntaxes were relevant for examples, in insisting that they are
| not required nor even specifically recommended.
|
| Other views on that?
Well, I don't think RDF is any *more* relevant than XTM, nor any
less. I would use both in Deliverable #2, but neither in #1.
The examples already in Deliverable #1 seem to me sufficient as they
are. I don't think we need anything more, provided we explain them.
--
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
