Rob Sanderson
Rob Sanderson
Yes, but we can't change the documents and issuing an actual erratum to say that something invisible could change to make things better is just wasting people's time. Hence, `postpone`...
Is the solution to instead advertise the Community Group? Or is this not errata, as it is still possible to post to the mailing list (even if there isn't an...
The mailing list responds to email with: > 550 This mailing list is no longer active. Please see http://www.w3.org/Mail/ meaning that this issue is valid and applies to all of...
Summary: Replace [email protected] with the community group's mailing list, [email protected].
From the description, the requirement for groups is that only members of the group be able to see the annotation (and hence it's an access control issue). #8 is explicitly...
I agree it's not completely disjoint. I think it is orthogonal, in that: - Both audience and access control via membership in a group are possible at the same time....
> typically this is an (implementation specific) request parameter Typically, but not in this case. From the protocol spec, section 4.2: > The number of IRIs or Annotation descriptions included...
> My concern and may claim is that individual pages are considered to be resources, consequently accessing the URIs/IRIs of these resources must return the same content at different points...
+1 to postpone -- we don't know what information is required for clients to display a preview yet, and we can both find that out and already implement it via...
You lost the target audience with "Simply ... SPARQL endpoint". In other words, the first sentence.