W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2007

Re: First draft of TAG Blog Entry on Version Identifiers

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:23:06 -0400
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: mark@coactus.com, www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF1BF78E25.0C1885C3-ON85257338.0006E9A5-85257338.00074E6A@lotus.com>

Mark Baker writes:

> That's quite good, but it seems incomplete because it doesn't discuss
> the use of external metadata, in particular media types.  Not that I
> expect every possible approach to be covered, but given the important
> role of media types in Web architecture (viz a viz the "Authoritative
> Metadata" finding), I think it bears mention.

I'll think about it.  The real focus here is on what to put in the 
instance, or as Henry clarified on our latest call, what the specfications 
for a data format should allow/require/prohibit regarding version 
information in the instance.  My first reaction to your suggestion was 
that external information is therefore out of scope.  On reflection, I can 
see reasoning along the lines of:  well, if you're going to weigh the 
benefits of putting versioning info in the document, you need to also talk 
about all the other places it could come from.  Maybe.  That does make 
some sense, but this is a draft blog entry, not a comprehensive TAG 
finding, and I'm a bit afraid that if I pull too hard on the ball of 
string I'll wind up with the whole versioning finding (which would be a 
good trick, since after 3 years of trying we don't yet have one of those.) 
 Anyway, thank you for the suggestion.  I'll think about it some.

Noah

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2007 01:22:44 GMT

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