W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mobileok-checker@w3.org > May 2007

RE: moki namespace

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 15:30:00 +0100
Message-ID: <C8FFD98530207F40BD8D2CAD608B50B43364C1@mtldsvr01.DotMobi.local>
To: "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>
Cc: <public-mobileok-checker@w3.org>

Dom

This makes sense to me. Presumably the document at the ns uri ought to point to some documentation of some kind, but since we are in development that documentation doesn't exist.

If we were to start using the namespace URI you suggest - I would suggest we do so straight away as an increasing number of documents are making reference to the ns - I'm hoping that this informal use doesn't break the rules and that we will only need the formal document at the URI once we go public?

Either way it has got to be better than the one we are using informally at the moment ...

Thanks
Jo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux [mailto:dom@w3.org]
> Sent: 28 May 2007 08:10
> To: Jo Rabin
> Cc: public-mobileok-checker@w3.org
> Subject: Re: moki namespace
> 
> Le samedi 26 mai 2007 à 11:07 +0100, Jo Rabin a écrit :
> > I think we'd better choose a namespace for moki - much as I like the
> > moki.mobi one, unfortunately it's actually a registered name. So
> > probably we need one at w3.org, does anyone know the policy on this?
> 
> The policy is describe at:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
> 
> Essentially, if we choose a namespace à la
> http://www.w3.org/2007/05/moki, it's just a matter of publishing a
> document there explaining what the namespace is for (which I can do
> trivially).
> 
> Dom
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2007 14:30:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:03 GMT