W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > March 2015

Re: describedby registration

From: Simeon Warner <simeon.warner@cornell.edu>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 11:43:57 +0000
Message-ID: <54F6EFFD.9080309@cornell.edu>
To: public-ldp@w3.org
Responding to a msg on the restricted ldp-wg list:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2015Mar/0000.html

Although rfc6892 (2013) defines 'describes' as the inverse of
'describedby', I think that it would be helpful for the later (2015) LDP
redefinition of 'describedby' to reinforce that for the avoidance of doubt.

Cheers,
Simeon

On 3/2/15 2:38 PM, Steve Speicher wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Robert Sanderson
> <azaroth42@gmail.com <mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> All,
>
> Apologies again for missing the call yesterday.
>
> A quick question:  Is there a technical or political reason why the
> registration of isdescribedby in the LDP spec does not state that
> it's the inverse relationship of describes?  Is this is the unwritten
> intent, however?
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> I believe the intent was that the current registration of
> "describedby" was limited to the definition in POWDER [1].  So we
> clarified it within LDP.  From what I recall, there was no need to
> add any clarity to the definition of "describes" as it is
> satisfactory as written for the needs of LDP.
>
> [1]:
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
>
> Regards, Steve Speicher http://stevespeicher.me
> <http://stevespeicher.me/>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
>
> -- Rob Sanderson Information Standards Advocate Digital Library
> Systems and Services Stanford, CA 94305
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 4 March 2015 11:44:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:38 UTC