Re: suggested shortnames

On 07/03/2012 08:39, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> On 07/03/12 06:01, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>
> +1

+1 too

>
>>> 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.
>
> +1, the best practice document should include "gld" or similar in the
> shortname.
>
> My personal pick would be gld-best-practice but have no very strong
> preference.

The mobile WG I was in produced a couple of Best Practice docs that have 
short names of mobile-bp and mwabp. The former works because it includes 
the word mobile but the same isn't true for mwabp which I always 
struggle to remember.

Personally I'd leave out the government bit but the group consensus 
seems to be to keep it, so I end up with suggesting

http://www.w3.org/TR/gld-bp

Phil


-- 


Phil Archer
W3C eGovernment
http://www.w3.org/egov/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1

Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 08:56:55 UTC