W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-publ-wg@w3.org > August 2017

Re: Identifying a book on the Web today

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 17:19:31 +0200
Cc: Baldur Bjarnason <baldur@rebus.foundation>, Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com>, David Wood <david.wood@ephox.com>, W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <773AA417-A340-457D-A4A5-281F1475BE0B@w3.org>
To: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>

> On 3 Aug 2017, at 15:58, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp <mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>> wrote:
> I am not sure how the discussion got to these high level points, to be honest. I do not think (or at least I hope) anybody seriously considered defining our own identifier scheme, alternative protocols, etc; I think we should definitely keep away from those issues. We work with what is on the Web and, I believe, our mantra is to minimize any specification we do and definitely avoid touching the fundamentals.
> I would like to allow secondary resources in PWPs to become first-class 
> citizens of the Web.  I hope that the PWG will consider this desideratum.

For the time being we are talking about WP-s and not PWP-s (ie, packaging is not yet discussed). WP-s, clearly must be first class citizens on the Web. PWP-s probably, but how packaged are handled may be a different issue.

> If this is accepted as a desideratum, we will then have to provide a mechanism.
> I think that a new URL scheme for PWP is a candidate of such a mechanism.
> Thus, I do not want to shut the door for such a URL scheme.

I am not sure I understand how a new URL scheme comes into the picture. I actually do not even understand what you mean by a new URL scheme:

- Does it mean that we would have publ://aaa.bbb.ccc <publ://aaa.bbb.ccc> ? Ie, we would have to define a new protocol instead of HTTP? 
	- Personally, I believe this is not something we can/should do. I simply do not believe it is realistic to even think about this.

- Does it mean that we should specific URL-s for PWP-s a bit like PURL-s or the HTTP URI versions of DOI-s, ie, HTTP URL schemes that provide unique identifications but that can be mapped onto locators? 
	- There has been so many attempts, successful or not, doing something like that, and I do not believe W3C should enter this game and create an N+1'th version of a locator independent URL-s for publishing. We should provide the mechanism to store these if they are around in our manifest, we should say how locators are used and what they return if they are dereferenced, but I do not believe we should _define_ a new one. Let the various communities define their own. (Besides, we explicitly put this type of work out of scope for this Working Group which, of course, leaves the door open to have it done in a newly created and separate WG if the membership accepts it. But that is only the administrative aspect.)

Did you have something else in mind?


> Regards,
> Makoto

Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2017 15:19:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:49:06 UTC