- From: Biplav Srivastava <sbiplav@in.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:48:17 +0530
- To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF25F0F9DE.1D38318D-ON652579BA.0021BE2E-652579BA.0022AF2E@in.ibm.com>
Hi, My two cents ... In the interest of consistency, I will suggest that we adopt a common prefix which clarifies to all users (including govt) that it was the contribution from this WG. We can use the prefix of gld-. . This will help people track provenance of name spaces. use common acronyms like pub (for publishing) and ld (for linked data) So, people becomes: gld-vocab-people or gld-people and publishing-linked-data become: gld-pub-ld or gld-pub Regards, --Biplav From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org Date: 03/07/2012 11:32 AM Subject: Re: suggested shortnames > For "org" and "people", I'm inclined to go with vocab-org and > vocab-people. I think http://www.w3.org/TR/people suggests a > somewhat > larger scope than this document has. +1 for vocab-people etc. - looks sensible and scalable to me. > The one aspect of > this that's not a coin flip, I think, is whether to put the word > "government" and the letter "g" in the title. I lean slightly > against > it, because I think it would scare away some people who would find the > document useful, but that's just my relatively uninformed opinion. We're chartered for GLD. Our prime 'customers' are government agency. Let's be honest and stick with what/who we are. Don't get me wrong - I love the idea that the stuff we write is reusable and in a sense applicable to other domains, but I think we're sending out the wrong message. I fear that in an attempt to maximise potential reuse down the line we fail to show respect and dedication towards our main audience: governments. > > If I had to pick right now, I'd go with "publishing-linked-data", > which > is a pretty long "short" name, but it's clear, at least. Hmmm ... unsure about this. Cheers, Michael -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html On 6 Mar 2012, at 23:26, Sandro Hawke wrote: > One aspect of publication by W3C is the assignment of a permanent > URL to > the document and its future versions. For example: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax > > http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris > > http://www.w3.org/TR/gov-data > > http://www.w3.org/TR/void > > http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub > > The selection of that last part, the "shortname", is technically up to > the W3C staff/management, but ideally it's something the WG is happy > with, too. > > In our last telecon I agreed to suggest names for our documents. > > For some of them, the current names on the editor's draft filenames > are > fine, I think: data-cube, data-cube-ucr, dcat, dcat-ucr. > > For "org" and "people", I'm inclined to go with vocab-org and > vocab-people. I think http://www.w3.org/TR/people suggests a > somewhat > larger scope than this document has. > > For bp, I don't have any great ideas. ldpb, linked-data-pb, > ld-best-practices, gld-best-practices, ld-pb, ld-pub, ... these would > all be acceptable, I think, but none are great. The one aspect of > this that's not a coin flip, I think, is whether to put the word > "government" and the letter "g" in the title. I lean slightly > against > it, because I think it would scare away some people who would find the > document useful, but that's just my relatively uninformed opinion. > > If I had to pick right now, I'd go with "publishing-linked-data", > which > is a pretty long "short" name, but it's clear, at least. > > So, those are my suggestions; I'm happy to discuss them more. > > -- Sandro > >
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 06:19:39 UTC