- 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
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