W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > July 2011

Re: Dataset URIs and metadata.

From: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:12:46 +0100
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Cc: public-lod@w3.org
Message-ID: <1311347566.2109.41.camel@Obsidian3>
On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 15:42 +0100, Michael Hausenblas wrote: 
> >>>
> >>> Probably VoID metadata/dataset URIs will be easier to discover once
> >>> the /.well-known/void trick (described in paragraph 7.2 of the W3C
> >>> VoID document) is widely adopted.
> >>
> >> greed. But it's not a 'trick'. It's called a standard.
> >
> > Is it?
> 
> Yes, I think that RFC5785 [1] can be considered a standard. Unless you  
> want to suggest that RFCs are sorta not real standards :P

:)

I'm aware that /.well-known is standardized in RFC5785.

It was the the claim that /.well-known/void is "a standard" that I was
surprised by. It's the sort of thing that could easily be on a Rec track
somewhere, I just wasn't aware of it.

FWIW I'm perfectly happy with VoID's current status as an Interest Group
note.

Cheers,
Dave

> On 22 Jul 2011, at 15:39, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 09:59 +0100, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
> >> Frans,
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >>> Probably VoID metadata/dataset URIs will be easier to discover once
> >>> the /.well-known/void trick (described in paragraph 7.2 of the W3C
> >>> VoID document) is widely adopted.
> >>
> >> greed. But it's not a 'trick'. It's called a standard.
> >
> > Is it?
> >
> > There was me thinking it was a Interest Group Note.
> >
> > Is there a newer version than:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/NOTE-void-20110303/
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> 
Received on Friday, 22 July 2011 15:13:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:34 UTC