- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 09:39:50 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
> On 3 Nov 2016, at 10:29, gsergiu <notifications@github.com> wrote: > > @iherman <https://github.com/iherman> > but would not expose the annotation structures directly and hence would use URN-s, as a matter of convenience, as IRI-s for the annotation. > > According to the dererencability recommendations, the URNs should be dereferencable as well, even if they are not "directly" deferencable. There should be some indications how to dereference URNs. Or at least this is how I understand the Deferencability recommendations. > > That is not my reading, see [my earlier comment](https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/372#issuecomment-257917121). And regardless… nobody would use it for the example I gave. It is used to handle, say, ISBN URN-s, DOI-s, and stuff like that, which are non HTTP URI-s used for public identification of things. The example I gave is very different. I do not see absolutely no reason for us to use a SHOULD when we cannot enforce it and, actually, I would not do it myself either if I implemented following the model I gave. We get to the point when, I believe, we have to agree that we disagree... -- GitHub Notification of comment by iherman Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/372#issuecomment-258097813 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2016 09:39:56 UTC