W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > June 2005

Agenda June 7 - Point 2 RE: [VM] Agenda for June 7 telecon

From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 12:02:19 +0200
To: "Thomas Baker" <thomas.baker@bi.fhg.de>, "SW Best Practices" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <GOEIKOOAMJONEFCANOKCOEEPGCAA.bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>

Some input for Point 2 of today's agenda

> 2. "Basic Steps for Managing an RDF Vocabulary" - next steps
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/principles/20050513

5. Publication

An RDF description of an RDF vocabulary should be published.  Potential users
should be clearly informed as to which is the 'authoritative' RDF description of
an RDF vocabulary.

Where the resources that are the members of an RDF vocabulary are denoted by
HTTP URIs, an HTTP GET request with the header field
'accept=application/rdf+xml' against that URI should return an RDF/XML
serialisation of an RDF graph that includes a description of the denoted


I was wondering about what I've been testing lately at
which tries to follow OASIS Published Subjects recommendation
but which is clearly, in regard of the above prose, not a best practice.

For example http://www.mondeca.com/system/publishing#Descriptor does not get to an RDF
file, but to an anchor in an HTML informal documentation. (So far in French, sorry -
currently working on the English version.) This seemed to be conformant to OASIS Published
Subjects recommendation, Requirement 2:

"A Published Subject Identifier must resolve to an human-interpretable Published Subject

The formal OWL-RDF decription is a separate resource at
According to Recommendation 2 in the same document
"A Published Subject Indicator may provide machine-processable metadata about itself."

But I guess the RDF schema should be included in the html page also, right?



Bernard Vatant
Senior Consultant
Knowledge Engineering

"Making Sense of Content" :  http://www.mondeca.com
"Everything is a Subject" :  http://universimmedia.blogspot.com

Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 10:02:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:43 UTC