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: Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 19:01:04 -0300
Message-ID: <CAHEREtv1HHWz3HT3SqYDakOhKirpQBVeVd1Qd0GD9_CdgvNfQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au
Cc: phila@w3.org, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, mark.harrison@cantab.net, W3C Vocabularies <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Terry.Rankine@csiro.au
Simon,

2015-05-08 0:36 GMT-03:00 <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>:

> Phil -
>
> I took a look through the Community Groups, and found
>     https://www.w3.org/community/perma-id/#
> which it appears you are/were involved in. AFAICT the outcome of that work
> is
>     http://w3id.org/
> which hosts redirects, and is intended to do this indefinitely. So anyone
> who has a resource-set (including a list of definitions) for which they
> would like a neutral/persistent baseURI, can request a directory (by
> issuing a pull-request), and hope it is approved by the administrators.
> Have I got it?
>
>
Thanks!
You find a good initiative/community that (looks to) fit with the "URN as
code" for SchemaOrg demands...
Only to confirm: the suggestion is to use w3id.org as baseURI of URNs and
URN-Resolvers?



> Schema.org already has a small presence.
>
>
If SchemaOrg evolves in this direction, what the strategy?
Perhaps we need first to do some homework ;-)
(I am starting to do mine here <https://github.com/ppKrauss/standard-URNs>)




> The technology is rather trivial - it is the intention which matters.
>

yes


> But it looks like a lighter-weight alternative to http://w3.org/ns -
> though governance is currently rather informal.
>
>
yes, better alternative...
Perhaps with SchemaOrg participation, some curatory aspects can be
formalized.

PPKrauss
Received on Saturday, 9 May 2015 22:01:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 9 May 2015 22:01:37 UTC