W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Important: Namespace Change

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 12:04:40 +0000
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtn9JX7LV52pzAZZPrBb+=qvzrrL3bABRzUzSTWim4XXGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
Cc: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>, public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Raphaël Troncy
<raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr> wrote:
> The .xml is misleading, why not putting a .rdf or .owl (as the standard
> practice by w3c)? Why not naming it 'oa' instead of 'schema'?

+1 oa.owl (which content-negotiates to oa.ttl or oa.rdf)


> For the final request of Ivan, getting an HTML (+RDFa) page for the spec, I
> find specgen very powerful and this is then very easy to generate your HTML
> version of the ontology, see https://bitbucket.org/wikier/specgen/wiki/Home
> which also lists all the other alternatives.

I've also found LODE very good, and a bit easier to use than specgen
which I could never get to work. Could you have a go with specgen?

http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/https://raw.github.com/stain/oa/master/schema.xml

-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Friday, 8 February 2013 12:05:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:22 UTC