W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > February 2012

Re: ISSUE-12 (valuesForDataFormat): What values to use to describe formats of dcat:Distribution? [DCAT]

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:27:20 +0000
Message-ID: <4F354568.5000502@w3.org>
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
CC: Government Linked Data Working Group WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
I referenced both Ivan's and Ed's work in a earlier post - and yes, even 
suggested bringing Ed's into w3.org. Nice to see I'm not the only one 
who struggles to read one e-mail in 4! Bernadette's points about the 
Purl federation and the work done there are valuable too.

The answer is, I think, that there is no single answer. It comes down to 
trust, as in: who do you trust to be around in 40 years' time?

That, of course, is unknowable so I think I'm happiest with, again, 
pointing to the "this is what we mean by a stable URI scheme" in the 
best practices doc and then maybe giving one or two examples and finally 
saying that if they can't find one then "foo/bar" is a reasonable 
fall-back.

On 10/02/2012 15:51, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>
> Or, why not re-deploy Ed's excellent http://mediatypes.appspot.com/
> under an W3C domain? :)
>
> Cheers,
> Michael
> --
> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
> Ireland, Europe
> Tel. +353 91 495730
> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
> http://sw-app.org/about.html
>
> On 10 Feb 2012, at 15:19, Phil Archer wrote:
>
>> I'm getting some push-back from gov data publishers on using DBpedia
>> sadly (it's third party, it's not real, it's not stable, not like all
>> our wonderful government department Web sites that sometimes stay on
>> line for whole months!). The PROMOM effort that Dave has highlighted
>> looks like the kind of thing they'd like more - government agency to
>> government agency - as long as there's no ".uk" anywhere in the URIs I
>> guess.
>>
>> How about "use a stable URI scheme for file formats if available,
>> falling back to the MIME type if not available" ?
>>
>> Phil.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/02/2012 15:06, John Erickson wrote:
>>>>> The Right Thing to do would be to get IETF to mint URIs for all media
>>>>> types, and get ESRI to register a media type for their file format,
>>>>> etc.
>>>>> This may not be feasible.
>>>
>>> ...or maybe we could just follow the same, de facto convention we've
>>> been following of using URIs from A Certain Third party:
>>>
>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/TIFF
>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/JPEG
>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/GZIP
>>>
>>> ...etc. ;)
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Phil Archer
>> W3C eGovernment
>> http://www.w3.org/egov/
>>
>> http://philarcher.org
>> +44 (0)7887 767755
>> @philarcher1
>>
>
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C eGovernment
http://www.w3.org/egov/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1
Received on Friday, 10 February 2012 16:27:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:35 UTC