W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > June 2006

Re: identifier or dc:URI?

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:06:12 +0200
Message-ID: <4497C894.3050309@w3.org>
To: Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>
Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org

Carlos Iglesias wrote:
> IMO if we have a clear use case for non-URI identifiers then we should
> choose "identifier", if not we should choose "URI"

For earl:WebContent it is clear that we need a URI to describe the resource. However, I can imagine some use cases for dc:identifier too. For example a hash or checksum of the resource to compare it at a later fetch of the same URI.

As to earl:Software, it seems to be the opposite approach: an identifier such as the build or version number may be the best identifier, and URI may sometimes be available too (as a location to download or find more information about the software).

> (but I'm not sure about what its "registered" status implies and how it 
> differs from the "recommended" status).

This is a good point, we already have this shaky dependency on foaf:Agent.


Shadi Abou-Zahra     Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe | 
Chair & Staff Contact for the Evaluation and Repair Tools WG | 
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)           http://www.w3.org/ | 
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI),   http://www.w3.org/WAI/ | 
WAI-TIES Project,                http://www.w3.org/WAI/TIES/ | 
Evaluation and Repair Tools WG,    http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/ | 
2004, Route des Lucioles - 06560,  Sophia-Antipolis - France | 
Voice: +33(0)4 92 38 50 64          Fax: +33(0)4 92 38 78 22 | 
Received on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 10:06:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:54 UTC