W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > May 2015

Re: Sustainable Codes vs Volatile URIs Re: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 09:11:40 -0700
Message-ID: <1431187900.39468.YahooMailBasic@web122904.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
To: W3C Vocabularies <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com>
We can agree about the "code is URN" assertion?

I can agree ...

But further, the universe at large can agree, and more importantly FIFA Football already agrees (all is right with the FIFA universe). They use 3 Character ISO Country Codes (as Acronym Labels)to designate the Clubs.  Governments are more particular with the Territorial Sovereignty issues, as they have to be.  The new US system (GENC) has some of the ISO codes, and many "Exceptions" - pet names, including some pet names for undisclosed locations.

Here is the point: any 3 character Acronym mapping to a 2 Character Acronym can *always*, no exceptions, be federalized by "Degrees" (Machin's est. of PI/4 = ((1/4)*ATAN(1/5)-ATAN(1/239)).  The *speed* of convergence makes absolutely no difference to URN users.  URI "users" want speed of convergence bragging rights.  They should watch Football instead, they could probably learn something about maths, Unicodes and public vocabularies.

--Gannon  
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 5/7/15, Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: Sustainable Codes vs Volatile URIs Re: URIs / Ontology for  Physical Units and Quantities
 To: "W3C Vocabularies" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
 Date: Thursday, May 7, 2015, 6:42 AM
 
 
 
 2015-05-07 5:36 GMT-03:00
 Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>:
 (...) But to put in bluntly, in many cases,
 well-maintained codes for standardized identities
 (languages, countries, towns, units ...) are more
 sustainable ways to share identities than
 URIs, 
 
 Perhaps
 I am not understanding, but there are some conceptual
 mistake?  "codes" in this sense, for me, are
 URNs; and URNs are URIs... Incremental
 examples:
 *
 "codes" are things controlled at https://github.com/datasets
 * the code of "Avestan" is
 "ae" in https://github.com/datasets/language-codes
 * in my context (ex. my house or my
 LAN) I can use my URN definition,  
  "urn:x-ok-datasets:language-codes:ae"
      that is the "alpha2" column
 in https://github.com/datasets/language-codes/blob/master/data/language-codes.csv  
   and the "URN Resolution" is the conversion from
 "alpha2" column to the "English"
 column.    ... And so on... In the same
 URN-x-ok schema are many other code types,     like
 "urn:x-ok-datasets:country-codes:us"
 defined by https://github.com/datasets/country-codes/ 
   we are not hostages of IANA, we can use URN for any
 code. so, codes are URNs ... We can
 agree about the "code is URN"
 assertion? 
 
 
Received on Saturday, 9 May 2015 16:12:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 9 May 2015 16:12:09 UTC