- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:26:54 +0200
- To: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-rdf-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Absolutely. Ivan ---- Ivan Herman Tel:+31 641044153 http://www.ivan-herman.net On 16 Apr 2011, at 17:31, RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > > RDF-ISSUE-39: rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices > > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/39 > > Raised by: Richard Cyganiak > On product: > > Dan Brickley said [1]: > > “Would be nice in 2011+ if the URIs for http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-synax-ns and nearby were a bit more human-friendly (RDFa? conneg?) and were around 2 clicks away from a community wiki...” > > Ideally, the rdf: and rdfs: namespace would resolve to a nice content-negotiated resource with RDF/XML, Turtle, N-Triples, RDF/JSON and HTML+RDFa variants and versioning. > > See [2], [3] and [4] for some guidance and implementations. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0258.html > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/ > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/ > [4] http://neologism.deri.ie/ > > >
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 16:25:18 UTC