- From: Nicholas Car via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 22:54:04 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
My preference would be for the use of specification URIs, not namespace URIs. This is because, according to all of the profiles thinking we have done in DXWG, a specification/profile is fundamentally a different thing from a namespace. Obviously specifications might have namespaces for their technical content but a specification is a "larger" thing than just a namespace. The problem here is, of course, that most specifications' URIs are not set up for any sort of machine actioning so the best you could currently hope for there is that the URI provide a universally unique identifier. I hope that, in time, specifications that wish to be well machine-readable provided Linked Data functionality for their specification URI so that you can get to both a human-readable specification document, as you can presently for a spec like, say, [DCAT](https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/) but that you can also get an RDF version of the specification. That specification version should probably be something like a [Profiles Vocabulary](https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof/) description of it which then tells you where all the other profile parts, such as machine-actionable constraints etc., are. This question is interesting for the profiles work so I'm tagging it *profiles-vocabulary* too. -- GitHub Notification of comment by nicholascar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1211#issuecomment-587945229 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2020 22:54:05 UTC