W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2003

RE: Site metadata; my preference

From: Jeffrey Winter <JeffreyWinter@crd.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 09:47:20 -0500
Message-ID: <3A9933B568A24543B6AD9E02C7E6ADA0C175A1@moe.crd.com>
To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, "Yves Lafon" <ylafon@w3.org>, "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, <timbl@w3.org>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>


> How to decide between the above two approaches? Is there any 
> *benefit* to giving the "metadata" a different URI than the 
> "data"? I'd say I prefer the RDF to be the authoritative 
> data/description about some resource so conneg
> gets my preference for that reason. 

If the data & metadata share a URI, how can you get
metadata about metadata?  If the metadata has its own
URI, conneg could be used to get the exact type of metadata
of interest, RDF, WSDL, etc.

But even that might not be enough.  There may be multiple
metadata documents of the same type associated
with a resource, or documents that don't have a
distinguishing type.

> (I'm not sure I like the  term "metadata"
> as it implies some secondary importance to that *data*)

This is precisely why it deserves its own URI.
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 09:47:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:16 GMT