Re: Data Identification section (was Re: reviewing the BP doc)

For our document, URIs and URLs are the same thing, since we are not concerned with entities that don’t have a location on the web. The document uses URI currently. I’m fine with keeping that or using URL instead. Either way, my point is that we don’t need to launch into a discussion of the differences. I’m fine with a footnote referencing RFC 3986 if people feel it’s necessary.
-Annette
--
Annette Greiner
NERSC Data and Analytics Services
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
510-495-2935

On Aug 13, 2015, at 2:02 AM, Manuel.CARRASCO-BENITEZ@ec.europa.eu wrote:

> Annette,
> 
> We should just use URL, the subset of URI with a network location mechanism. We *cannot* redefine term such URL and we must just point to the source specifications: we cannot break the existing specifications.
> 
> I agree that the document is getting to long and hence the proposition to separate the identification: it is easier to produce and consume.
> 
> Regards
> Tomas
> 
> 
> From: Annette Greiner [amgreiner@lbl.gov]
> 
> Sent: 12 August 2015 20:11
> 
> To: Phil Archer
> 
> Cc: CARRASCO BENITEZ Manuel (DGT); public-dwbp-wg@w3.org
> 
> Subject: Re: Data Identification section (was Re: reviewing the BP doc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 12, 2015, at 7:56 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * ?R?
> 
> URI, URL, URN, IRI. Just use URI everywhere and add something like:
> 
> 
> 
>  "In this specification, the term URI is used for the identification schemes: URI, URL, URN and IRI ..."
> 
> 
> 
> This is line with the recommendation in RFC3986
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-1.1.3
> 
> 
> 
>  " ... Future specifications and related documentation should use the general term "URI" rather than the more restrictive terms "URL" and "URN" ..."
> 
> 
> 
> But
> we *want* to be restrictive. We're only talking about HTTP URIs, we're not talking about URNs, or even URLs. Hence I think we need to say something, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny, I take the fact that we want to be restricted to discussing URIs as a reason *not* to add a discussion about them vs. URNs or URLs. The fact that we use a term in our document doesn’t mean that we have to define it. It is defined elsewhere in W3C
> space plenty. Our document is already annoyingly long; let’s help readers get to what is helpful information and leave out discussion that is not unique to publishing data on the web.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Annette Greiner
> 
> NERSC Data and Analytics Services
> 
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
> 
> 510-495-2935
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 18:55:22 UTC