- From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:58:33 +0100
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- CC: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>
Harry, I wonder if you can help us out a little here. Following on from all the discussions about HTTP Link (as your inbox shows, I've been looking at that today) it's clear that we're going to need to register a relationship type /somewhere/ - probably IANA and possibly in Hixie's HTML 5 group. What I'm nit sure about is what that relationship type should be. In one of your posts to the TAG [1] you propose describedBy as a generic "find a description of me other there" rel type. You don't make it clear whether describedBy has the implicit assumption that what will be returned will be RDF. Is that your assumption? I ask because I think we /may/ need two or possibly even three different rel types: rel="powder" where the link is to an XML file with root element in the POWDER namespace that can be GRDDL'd into RDF/OWL, OR directly to an RDF/OWL document that contained POWDER elements (which you need to understand outside the RDF/OWL model to be able to process it fully) rel="describedBy" which would point to a URI from which RDF triples would be returned about whatever linked to it - i.e. the output of what we'd call a POWDER Processor. If describedBy is meant to be very generic then it can take care of all of these cases and others besides, but I wonder whether that is the optimal way forward?? As ever, I'm far from sure so any help you might be able to offer would be much appreciated! Thanks Phil. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Mar/0053.html
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2008 14:59:31 UTC