RE: [xri] Glossary normative?

["Dave McAlpin" <Dave.McAlpin@epok.net>]

I wondered the same thing yesterday when I was going through the
resolution draft, which assumes the glossary is part of the syntax spec.
I don't have a strong preference either way, but I do think that syntax
is sufficiently well-defined without a normative glossary.

-----Original Message-----
From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net] 
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 9:29 AM
To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xri] Glossary normative?

Dave,

One thing for today's call: I just realized is that we've designated the
Primer as non-normative, yet we've planned to put the Glossary there,
which
in XRI 1.0 we said was normative (for definitions of terms like
"segment"
and "absolute identifier", etc.)

Should we instead make the Glossary an appendix to XRI Syntax?

=Drummond 



To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xri/members/leave_workgroup
.php.


-- 

Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.305 / Virus Database: 265.8.9 - Release Date: 2/17/2005