W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > July 2015

[web-annotation] Should the namespace change?

From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 20:32:24 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-93884306-1436387543-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
azaroth42 has just created a new issue for 

== Should the namespace change? ==
>From #46, there is the question of whether the namespace should change
 for the model. 

Note that this is only a concern from the RDF perspective, not the 
preferred JSON serialization which won't have even a prefix, let alone
 the complete namespace (per #12).  

>From the telco on 2015-07-08, some of the discussion included:
* There's a lot of use of the namespace
* Changing namespaces is generally a bad idea
* Backwards compatibility without changing the namespace is important
* The CG spec is explicitly a draft, so we need not feel too 
constrained by changing the definitions in a non-backwards-compatible 
* It demonstrates continuity and inclusion, rather than division and 
competition, hopefully avoiding splitting the community of practice
* It has the oa acronym ... which would be confusing without the 

The decision on the call was to defer the decision until later.

See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/53
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2015 20:32:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:37 UTC