W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > February 2011

Re: Comments on the profile management (Re: RDFa Default Profile Management/Vocabularies/Authoring)

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:27:44 -0500
Message-ID: <4D615D20.1010803@digitalbazaar.com>
To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Hey Ivan,

Sorry to hear that you're sick. :(

On 02/20/2011 11:07 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
> some small comments on the Wiki page
> - I know we have gone back and forth with the number of profile files
> and their mutual relationship. I am not sure we have a final decision
> on whether the rdfa-1.1 is a subset of html-rdfa-1.1. I am afraid
> that would be an administrative nightmare. My recollection is that
> rdfa-1.1 is a profile for _all_ rdfa content and, additionally,
> html-rdfa-1.1 is added for (X)HTML. Typically, rdfa-1.1 is on the
> definition of prefixes that can be used in general, so I do not
> really see any harm...

I vaguely remember us discussing that and coming to the conclusion you
state above. I've updated the wiki page to reflect this. If anybody that
feels that this is not the direction that we agreed to head in, or want
to go in, should speak up now.

> - I think it is good to say 'should' for the caching of profiles


> - I would not want to have a reference to purl.org. I am not against
> purl.org at all, but I do not think it is relevant in this text.

The reason I placed the reference to purl.org in there is to give people
an understanding of what we mean by "long-lived" and "persistent URL
service". I've changed the wording to take the purl.org vocabulary out
of the requirement and place it into a sentence describing an example of
such a service:

If the storage location of the vocabulary may change over time, the
vocabulary maintainer SHOULD use a persistent URL re-directing service
to provide a URL that is guaranteed to resolve to the vocabulary
document over the course of 30+ years. For example, the http://purl.org/
service is one such persistent URL re-directing service.

> In general, the 'Maintaining a Vocabulary in a default profile'
> sounds like a more general set of statements on profiles. I am not
> sure it is appropriate for the page on default profile. Let us not
> overspecify things.

That section is important to ensure that people that want to have their
prefixes/vocabularies in the default profile are aware of the
maintenance requirements of vocabularies in the default profile. These
requirements do have some things in common w/ maintaining regular
vocabularies, but we don't really specify what those requirements are

I'm getting ready to ask a number of communities if they would like
their vocabularies placed into the default profile and need to be able
to point them at something that summarizes what is expected of them once
their vocabulary is in a default profile.

I do think it is appropriate on that page because it helps folks get a
complete picture of how all of this default profile stuff is going to
work (from the viewpoint of W3C, vocabulary authors, and web page
authors). If you feel strongly that we should remove it, where else
should we put the information - another wiki page?

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Towards Universal Web Commerce
Received on Sunday, 20 February 2011 19:05:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:51 UTC