Re: ISSUE-81 Suggested Name Changes

Thanks Steve for putting the wiki page together.

To help figure out where people stand on the different proposals I set up 
a poll: http://www.doodle.com/qf5am2pu89fcyaz2

Please, everyone, go there and vote for your favorite.
Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group


Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com> wrote on 09/30/2013 10:19:14 AM:

> From: Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com>
> To: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS, 
> Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
> Date: 09/30/2013 10:20 AM
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-81 Suggested Name Changes
> 
> Hey John,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > I moved the proposals into a Wiki page [1] so we could do some 
> > better side-by-side comparisons.  I think we should be closed on 
> > what the proposals are, there are a few questions I put inline with 
> > some of the proposals (Miguel's and Ted's) 

> The questions don't leap out... I search for "?" to find them then? 
>  I was not sure if those were from you vs others/authors in the 
> original threads.
>  
> I called out the names, so I thought that would have been enough for
> those authors to find. 
> Do we need a column for the combination of inverse predicate and 
> member object (foaf:primaryTopic example) ?  5.2.10 pretty much says
> it's allowed, although we've never discussed it that I can recall...
> no doubt a simple consequence of "unless we prohibit it, 
> independently specified features can be used together".
> I thought about it but the page was already getting pretty wide.  We
> can easily scroll though.  Will do if you think it will help. 
> 
> - Steve Speicher
> 
> Best Regards, John
> 
> Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages 
> Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario