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

Re: suggested shortnames

From: Martin Kaltenböck <m.kaltenboeck@semantic-web.at>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:41:08 +0100 (CET)
To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org, Benedikt Kämpgen <kaempgen@fzi.de>
Message-ID: <ecbd5751-56a8-4e68-91c6-15f1739ce69a@zcs>
Hi all

On 07/03/12 12:33, Benedikt Kämpgen wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> vocab-people
>> vocab-org for the Organization Ontology?
>> vocab-data-cube for the Data Cube Vocabulary?
>
> All fine for me. For the Data Cube Vocabulary vocab-qb would probably work as well.



Martin: +1 from me (also when Sandros 1st suggestion: publishing-linked-data was for sure the best human readable
version of this I do think that the short versions are better for future use)

Cheers - martin



>
> Best,
>
> Benedikt
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 12:27 AM
>> To: public-gld-wg@w3.org
>> Subject: suggested shortnames
>>
>> One aspect of publication by W3C is the assignment of a permanent URL to
>> the document and its future versions.   For example:
>>
>>          http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax
>>
>>          http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris
>>
>>          http://www.w3.org/TR/gov-data
>>
>>          http://www.w3.org/TR/void
>>
>>          http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub
>>
>> The selection of that last part, the "shortname", is technically up to the W3C
>> staff/management, but ideally it's something the WG is happy with, too.
>>
>> In our last telecon I agreed to suggest names for our documents.
>>
>> For some of them, the current names on the editor's draft filenames are
>> fine, I think: data-cube, data-cube-ucr, dcat, dcat-ucr.
>>
>> For "org" and "people", I'm inclined to go with vocab-org and
>> vocab-people.   I think http://www.w3.org/TR/people suggests a somewhat
>> larger scope than this document has.
>>
>> For bp, I don't have any great ideas.   ldpb, linked-data-pb,
>> ld-best-practices, gld-best-practices, ld-pb, ld-pub, ... these would
>> all be acceptable, I think, but none are great.     The one aspect of
>> this that's not a coin flip, I think, is whether to put the word
>> "government" and the letter "g" in the title.   I lean slightly against
>> it, because I think it would scare away some people who would find the
>> document useful, but that's just my relatively uninformed opinion.
>>
>> If I had to pick right now, I'd go with "publishing-linked-data", which is a
>> pretty long "short" name, but it's clear, at least.
>>
>> So, those are my suggestions; I'm happy to discuss them more.
>>
>>       -- Sandro
>>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2012 08:42:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:26 UTC