Great! So, just to keep the ball rolling, if I don't hear anything by
Tuesday night (2015-04-28), I shall merge in the latest
https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf/pull/10
as proposed on Friday.

This would include renaming to `uniqueReference()` which I think
strikes a good balance of non-IRI-ness and non-local-identifier-ness.



I just added a section about blank node to the user guide which can be
adapted either way:

http://commonsrdf.incubator.apache.org/userguide.html#Blank_node



On 24 April 2015 at 19:34, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote:
> If COMMONSRDF-6 evolves towards a general agreement, we can wait some days
> more for 0.1-incubating release.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I would prefer to include the tidy-up text using "reference" as word
>> and avoid the current implementation specifics, but leave the actual
>> method renaming for later unless we get a quick agreement.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2015 at 20:36, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > 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
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
>> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 6602747925
> e: [email protected]
> w: http://redlink.co



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

Reply via email to