W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2013

Re: URIs in data primer draft updated & httpRange-14 background

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 12:04:00 +0100
To: <www-tag@w3.org>
Cc: <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Message-ID: <00a401ce1bec$a4862690$ed9273b0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 23:01:12 +0000, Jeni Tennison wrote:

> I have updated the draft of the "URIs in Data Primer" which
> is here:
>
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/uris-in-data-2013-03-07/

Great work!

Just some minor comments. I think example 4 would be clearer if it would
include a link to the image itself (just as most landing do). Something
like:

{
  "@id": "http://photo.example.com/psd/12345",
  "type": "image",
  "creator": "Paul Downey",
  "license": "http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/",
  "url": "http://photo.example.com/psd/12345/original.jpeg"
}

Or explain why it isn't there. You talk about this in ection 4.3 but I think
almost everyone will wonder why it isn't done already at this point.

I would also suggest to change the name to Paul S. Downey since you are
using "psd" in your URIs.. otherwise every graphic designer will think of
Photoshop files :-)


The note under example 4 is a bit confusing IMHO. You could argue that if
the image itself can be retrieved at http://photo.example.com/psd/12345,
then that URI *is* identifying the image. The JSON would just be a different
representation of the same resource.

Not sure about this one but isn't a "URI property" a "identifier property"?
Without context, I would interpret the term "URI property" as "every
property whose value is an URI"... which then becomes confusing in section
4.1

s/photograph of his poster had/photograph of this poster had/


This is a really great summary almost everyone would understand. Awesome
work!


Thanks,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Friday, 8 March 2013 11:04:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 8 March 2013 11:04:39 GMT