- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 16:57:32 +0100
- To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, "janowicz@ucsb.edu" <janowicz@ucsb.edu>, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "phila@w3.org" <phila@w3.org>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
- Cc: "ssimmons@opengeospatial.org" <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
Hi Kerry, Le 01/02/2017 à 03:11, Kerry Taylor a écrit : [...] > I believe the W3C often has no ontology sitting at a namespace uri, but > instead a list of entities in the namespace and some documentation. Can > Francois comment? I'm not sure what you call "a list of entities in the namespace and some documentation". In the linked data era we're now in, people expect to be able to dereference namespace uris and get meaningful information, meaning an HTML page for humans, some RDF serialization for machines. That was not the case some years ago, but I think we typically publish ontology files at namespace uris nowadays, possibly using content negotiation so that people may see an HTML page, a Turtle serialization of the ontology, etc. depending on the Accept HTTP header. That is the case for the RDF, RDF Schema, OWL, Prov namespace URIs for instance. Francois.
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2017 15:57:54 UTC