- From: Ronald E. Daniel <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 10:54:32 -0700
- To: conklin@info.cren.net
- Cc: uri@bunyip.com
Jim Conklin sez: > Does it make any sense to consider including "ratings" (i.e., a _short_ > synopsys of a review or other val;ue judgement) and referencing longer > reviews (i.e., real documents) through appropriate use of URLs rather than > including what could be real documents in a URC? That is pretty much what I proposed for the SOAP element - it would contain a tiny indication of what the reviewer thought (such as a -10 to +10 rating), information on who did the review, and an optional URN to use to get a full review. All of that could be protected by a digital signature. <soap> was a special case of <review> to allow sorts of reviews to be put into URCs. Ron
Received on Wednesday, 4 January 1995 12:54:47 UTC