W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2008

Re: Uniform access to descriptions

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:47:47 -0400
Message-Id: <76C66BE0-E76E-43B6-86B6-9BAD36C5BFDA@creativecommons.org>
Cc: "Michael K. Bergman" <mike@mkbergman.com>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
To: wangxiao@musc.edu


On Apr 11, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Xiaoshu Wang wrote:
> I didn't get it. :-(

Sorry. I just meant that you seemed to be commenting on the phrase  
"Uniform Access to Descriptions", a heading that I invented because I  
needed a heading. In that case you would be asking me what I had in  
mind. I didn't mean anything very precise by it and in fact had in  
mind all sorts of information that would not ordinarily be called  
"description".

>> The wiki page [1] does not define the term, but it does say  
>> "Descriptions might include information about the thing such as  
>> bibliographic metadata, factual information, reviews or  
>> assessments, related materials, access control or licensing  
>> information, etc.".
> This is really what gives me the problem, I don't know why these  
> information should (or need to) be modeled in HTTP LINK.
> Jonathan, please don't take my insistence on a definition for  
> *description* in a bad way. [...] I want Phil and you to postpone  
> the LINK solution because only do we know how TAG settles on the  
> relationship between the above mentioned entities can we know what  
> is not defined and then fit in its structure accordingly.

I am not advocating Link:, at least not yet. I am looking at use  
cases, considering options, and getting input, and will write some  
kind of issue summary report, then take stock. It would be  
unfortunate if Link: were not the best solution, since it is mature  
and has relatively strong support. If the TAG and others agree with  
you that Link: is unacceptable (the word "egregious" was used in  
Vancouver) then things will start getting interesting.
Received on Sunday, 13 April 2008 17:49:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:55 GMT