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

Feedback on the describedby @rel type and more

From: Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 16:15:26 +0000
Message-ID: <492C249E.30702@philarcher.org>
To: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>

I sent this yesterday but I see it hasn't reached the archive so I'm 
sending it again in the hope that it works this time.

Hi All,

Last week I got several e-mails from other people involved in the HTTP
Link and @rel value issues. Some of them were just sent to me personally
but I want to put them on the record for future reference and as a
summary of where we are today.

Mark Nottingham is expecting to publish a new version of the HTTP Link
draft any day now. Assuming no negative feedback, he'll then seek
transition to RFC.

Julian Reschke has pointed out various things. Firstly, the current IANA
registry for @rel values [1] is purely for ATOM. This was the centre of
query from IANA [2]. Julian also pointed out that the ATOM example [3]
should be changed to use link @rel cf. <wdrs:describedby> so that's a
change we should probably make. Finally he's querying the use of
wdrs:describedby since both that and the describedby @rel type expand
into different URIs - we need to say they're the same.

I've also had a chat with Julian and the end result is that I've edited
section 4.1 of the DR doc in accordance with this. See (and comment) on
the result at [4]. That done, I can now write to IANA with some

Jonathan Rees (Creative Commons and TAG) asks why we're using
describedby and not meta - I'll be answering his question shortly on
this list).

Jonathan also comments on my note to IANA saying that the relationship:

A describedby B

Doesn't put any constraints on B. Well, actually, it does - it
constrains B to be descriptive of A and for it to be applicable - which
is true. I was being sloppy - what I meant was that the format of B is
not constrained. I'll include a comment to this effect in my new note to

Finally, Eran Hammer-Lahav (who came to the event at Yahoo! in
September) has set up a discussion group to look into metadata
discovery. As we have noted before, this is a discussion that has gone
and on and on... Eran is trying to draw out a consensus. See [5] and
join in if you're so inclined.



[1] http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Nov/0016.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-powder-dr-20081114/#eg4-4
[4] http://philarcher.org/powder/20081124.html#assoc (temporary URI!)
[5] http://groups.google.com/group/metadata-discovery

Phil Archer
e. phil@philarcher.org
w. http://philarcher.org/
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2008 16:16:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:06:04 UTC