W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-powderwg@w3.org > May 2008

rel=describedBy or rel=powder ?

From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:58:33 +0100
Message-ID: <48207219.8070903@icra.org>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
CC: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>

Harry,

I wonder if you can help us out a little here.

Following on from all the discussions about HTTP Link (as your inbox 
shows, I've been looking at that today) it's clear that we're going to 
need to register a relationship type /somewhere/ - probably IANA and 
possibly in Hixie's HTML 5 group. What I'm nit sure about is what that 
relationship type should be.

In one of your posts to the TAG [1] you propose describedBy as a generic 
"find a description of me other there" rel type. You don't make it clear 
whether describedBy has the implicit assumption that what will be 
returned will be RDF. Is that your assumption?

I ask because I think we /may/ need two or possibly even three different 
rel types:

rel="powder" where the link is to an XML file with root element in the 
POWDER namespace that can be GRDDL'd into RDF/OWL, OR directly to an 
RDF/OWL document that contained POWDER elements (which you need to 
understand outside the RDF/OWL model to be able to process it fully)

rel="describedBy" which would point to a URI from which RDF triples 
would be returned about whatever linked to it - i.e. the output of what 
we'd call a POWDER Processor.

If describedBy is meant to be very generic then it can take care of all 
of these cases and others besides, but I wonder whether that is the 
optimal way forward?? As ever, I'm far from sure so any help you might 
be able to offer would be much appreciated!

Thanks

Phil.


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Mar/0053.html
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2008 14:59:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:42:12 GMT