Sorry, language issue, I actually wanted to say something like: "when COMMONSRDF-6 will be resolved (...)"
Either discuss a better naming and text or shift it for 0.2 are valid options. But clearly it's an aspect that requires further discussion, and last minute changes could not get the required consensus. So I would personally prefer to keep it as it is for now, a resolve COMMONSRDF-6 in the next release. What all the other people think? On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23/04/15 16:21, Sergio Fernández wrote: > >> With COMMONSRDF-6 resolved we' d be ready to release. >> > > Declaring COMMONSRDF-6 resolved at the last minute is what I think is a > bad idea. > > The current text is using the word/concept of "identifier" in two > different ways. The qualified text is reasonable (if you know the answer!) > but I remain unconvinced that adjacent uses is helpful or the new split of > class/factory text works (see suggestion on JIRA) ; I want to take time > over reviewing changes and suggesting more but not to let that stop a > release. > > Let's leave this open across the release with no more than our "best" > approximation for now (AKA what happens to be in the codebase at the > release point). > > Andy > -- Sergio Fernández Partner Technology Manager Redlink GmbH m: +43 6602747925 e: [email protected] w: http://redlink.co
