W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: RDF-ISSUE-39: rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:26:54 +0200
Message-Id: <4FE095D3-CD04-4378-A9D1-D606BE1AC448@w3.org>
Cc: "public-rdf-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
To: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Absolutely. 

Ivan

----
Ivan Herman
Tel:+31 641044153
http://www.ivan-herman.net



On 16 Apr 2011, at 17:31, RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:

> 
> RDF-ISSUE-39: rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/39
> 
> Raised by: Richard Cyganiak
> On product: 
> 
> Dan Brickley said [1]:
> 
> “Would be nice in 2011+ if the URIs for http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-synax-ns and nearby were a bit more human-friendly (RDFa? conneg?) and were around 2 clicks away from a community wiki...”
> 
> Ideally, the rdf: and rdfs: namespace would resolve to a nice content-negotiated resource with RDF/XML, Turtle, N-Triples, RDF/JSON and HTML+RDFa variants and versioning.
> 
> See [2], [3] and [4] for some guidance and implementations.
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0258.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/
> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/
> [4] http://neologism.deri.ie/
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 16:25:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT