Re: New Specification Published!

On Feb 7, 2013, at 17:15 , Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:

> To try to summarize, the following properties seem desirable for the namespace:
> 
> * Stable
> * Memorable
> * ... (via) Brand name recognition
> * Short
> * Ends in #
> * Only one / (eg not /ns/openannotation/core#) if I understand Raphael correctly
> 
> And if I may throw one more consideration in to the mix, it would
> cover the memorable and short desiderata if the namespace followed
> exactly the pattern of a TR/ path for the specification.
> Thus if the spec were to have its final home at www.w3.org/TR/OA/ then
> it would make sense (to me) for the namespace to be www.w3.org/ns/OA#
> 
> And then replace OA above with whatever is deemed most appropriate for
> both paths.
> 
> The suggestions:
> * OA
> * oa
> * OA-core
> * oa-core
> * annotation
> * openanno
> * openannotation
> 
> Herbert and my preference would be:
>    http://www.w3.org/TR/openannotation/
>    http://www.w3.org/ns/openannotation#

As I said in one of my previous mails, it should not be both. It should either be '#' based, ie

http://www.w3.org/ns/openannotation#

meaning you guys give me (or Phil) one file with the full vocabulary and we install it, or it is

http://www.w3.org/ns/openannotation/

meaning you guys give me (or Phil) one file per term/concept and we install them.

But it cannot be both. And it is obviously way more simple to manage the '#' format.

(I do not have a strong opinion on the oa vs. OA vs. openannotation)

Ivan


> 
> 
> Dewitt Clinton once (good naturedly) chided me that OpenSearch
> succeeded where SRU/CQL did not was not due to technology, but due
> simply to the name.  I think that we have a reasonably well known
> "brand" with Open Annotation, and that it would be shame to not
> capitalize on it for the sake of saving a few bytes.
> 
> Rob
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf