Editorial fixes for Prof 3 pwd candidate prior to introducing final substantive change proposals.

[nicholascar]

See the rendered HTML: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/prof-3PWD-candidate/prof/

[aisaac]

I'm not sure why 521, 507, 802, 453, 795 are not mentioned in the doc anymore. As long as they remain open on github while they're under discussion, that's fine, but this makes it less clear, what's the rationale for having issues referenced or not in the document.

[aisaac]

In 6.8 Repetition in "Constraint Languages are frequently used in profile profile definitions"

[aisaac]

OK I've reviewed what I could review. All comments that I think could (some should) be addressed are now above!

[aisaac]

I forgot to say - impressive work, @nicholascar !

[kcoyle]

There seems to be content here that is not resolved in issues. For example, @aisaac are you satisfied with the resolution of "prof:isTransitiveProfileOf needs more convincing case and/or example #643"? Also, we have: "Improve defintion of prof:isTransitiveProfileOf #1071", "Suggested updates to definition of PROF constructs #1061" not to mention about 80 other open issues. What is being proposed for all of the open issues that are not considered "at risk"?

[aisaac]

@kcoyle I think it is ok to have a PR doing things not in issues, and not tackling all open issues. There could be another later PWD candidate to address the open issues, for sure. Maybe it's already in preparation. This PR is already big; I think in general they should be more granular.

[kcoyle]

Regarding the definition of profiles (for this and for the conneg document), the approved language is:

Data Profile

A data specification that constrains, extends, combines, or provides
guidance or explanation about the usage of other data specifications.

Data Specification

A specification, with human- and/or machine-processable representations,
that defines the content and structure of data used in a given context.

While it probably makes sense to say in the definitions area that the word "profile" will be used in the document to mean what is defined as "data profile", the group did vote to define the term as "data profile."

[kcoyle]

@aisaac You may have missed the information on the deadline. The date and time of tomorrow's meeting is the final deadline for a CR-ready version of PROF and of conneg. There will not be additional "PRs" except in support of a Working Group note. That is why I am questioning the disposition of open issues. I'm trying to understand whether this version is considered final or if the editors are planning to continue the work as a note.

[rob-metalinkage]

The PR is not addressing the definitions - thats a substantive change that needs to be isolated to a separate PR. I think the problem is in the title - i'll rename it..
Fix up typos and grammar for now - dont change scope of this PR. This will help reviewing PRs with the substantive changes.

[aisaac]

Thanks for the clarification @rob-metalinkage . @kcoyle this was indeed my approach when looking at this PR. Not requiring that it does everything. In fact I implicitly said earlier to @nicholascar that it would be great if we would stop piling things in here, because otherwise I can't review them :-)

[nicholascar]

@aisaac I've addressed 4 of your comments requesting changes (see commits above linking to comment IDs) and regarding #1074 (comment) (Issues removed):

• Consider the addition of a conformanceTarget property #521 - the proponant (Rob) is happy for this to be added as Future Work and a poll so far indicates watching participants' agreement so I thought it would serve no purpose to leave in the doc. We should address it, and all other future-work tagged issues after PWD release
• What does prof:profileOf entail? #507 - duplicate for the now "at risk" issue (#1078) in the doc which I added to highlight the proposed axiom. There are about 4 issues that all get at the same thing
• Does "profile of" require all or some elements? #802 - one of the semi-duplicates for the above. The axiom answers the question so if it's accepted then this Issue is for Guidance (which I think is the right place for it)
• Consider use of adms:identifier instead of prof:token #453 - this has been addressed in a commit above, as per your request. I thought it would be so I'd like to see the PR pulled through to ED so I can tag the Issue as due-for-closing. Seems onerous to keep back-and-forth tagging (chicken and egg)
• Comments on "inheritance" #795 - I think this is now well addressed by the isTransitiveProfileOf semantics (linked to above) and the axiom so I've taken it out of this PR. I will reference the proposed solution, and the example in the doc from SKOS as per Karen's comment in the Issue, in an email to the ShEx group that raised it.

[aisaac]

OK @nicholascar thanks for the explanation and the last edits which indeed fix the typos that I had found and revert the definition to the official one.

And I agree with removing the reference to the couple of issues you flag as "(near-)duplicates". Even if they are still open, the document makes reference to "nearby" issues. It would be confusing to point the reader to all the issues in our web - it's already quite difficult for ourselves...