W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2010

Re: Web Linking and @rev

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 15:48:38 +1000
Cc: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4D8C7D68-CC6D-49D0-9990-2360BDE0F98D@mnot.net>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Hi Kingsley,

We've been back and forth on this issue a *lot*. The current solution is still to define the syntax, but not the semantics, of rev, because we can't come to consensus on it, and it's widely agreed that it isn't well-used in many cases (not necessarily yours).


On 12/05/2010, at 11:00 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:

> Mark,
> I just read your note [1] re. @rev. Is it judicious to drop @rev just on the basis of potential confusion? In reality, we used @rev in DBpedia to completely demystify what's happening re. Linked Data i.e., the critical relation between a Descriptor Documents and its Unambiguously Named (via Generic HTTP URI) Subject. 
> In one single URL-rewrite move we've been able to solve a complex and typically jargon ladened riddle. If you veer people away from @rev, we are taking steps backward.
> Links:
> 1. http://xml.coverpages.org/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-10.txt -- Web Linking Note
> 2. http://mediterraneanceramics.blogspot.com/2010/05/document-and-concept-this-and-how.html -- a post about Descriptor Documents and their Unambiguously Named Subjects .
> -- 
> Regards,
> Kingsley Idehen	      President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen 

Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 17 May 2010 05:49:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:29:48 UTC