W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > September 2012

RE: new itemscope or not?

From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:59:09 -0400
Message-ID: <52E301F960B30049ADEFBCCF1CCAEF59116D0D44@OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
To: "Ed Summers" <ehs@pobox.com>, "Dawson, Laura" <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
Cc: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@jenitennison.com>, "Thad Guidry" <thadguidry@gmail.com>, <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I love how LC upgraded LCCNs to Linked Data without buying into the myth
that they identified "cards" or "records" or "controlled headings".
(Thanks and a lift of the lynch lid to Ed!)

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ed.summers@gmail.com [mailto:ed.summers@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Ed Summers
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 3:34 PM
> To: Dawson, Laura
> Cc: Jeni Tennison; Thad Guidry; public-vocabs@w3.org
> Subject: Re: new itemscope or not?
> 
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Dawson, Laura
<Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
> wrote:
> > So many identifiers are not URLs. They can be related to URLs (as
> > DOIs) but they are not URLs themselves.
> 
> Yes, but most are can be expressed as URIs.
> 
> //Ed
> 
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 23:09:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 7 September 2012 23:09:07 GMT