Re: rel="meta" or rel="acl" ? was: Web Access Cntrl Spec?

On 10 Aug 2013, at 14:40, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 10 August 2013 14:23, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10 August 2013 10:56, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
> 
> On 10 Aug 2013, at 00:18, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
> 
> >> When talking about this with Alexandre Bertails he thought that rel="meta" was
> >> not the right relation and that rel="acl" would be more correct.
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > It will be fixed.
> 
> We need to get those who have implementations to agree on this first. :-)
> 
> And I am not sure what forum is available where we can agree on edits to
> the acl ontolgy or the http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl wiki page,
> so I am sending this mail a bit widely around. The WebAccessControl wiki
> page suggests that the RWW Community Group is the place to discuss this.
> 
> I suppose for the moment the WebAccessControl wiki page plays the role of a
> spec. It says:
> 
> [[
>   The client follows, for example, an HTTP header field:
> 
>   Link: <meta/profile.meta>; rel=meta
> ]]
> 
> Alexandre Bertails once argued that meta is too general, and that this should
> be an "acl" link. Neither "acl" nor "meta" are registered in the iana document
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
> which is I think where this needs to be registered.
> See http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-6.1
> 
> For us to register this we should probably have something a bit more
> spec like than the wiki page.
> 
> I also would like to add to the ontology
>  - support for regular expressions on urls
>  - a acl:include relation to include acls from other documents
> 
> I'm happy to change implementations if there's a good reason to.
> 
> However, we've been using rel="meta" since at least 2009
> 
> That's not a good enough reason not to change it. :)
>   
> 
> My understanding of the ACL system was that is was a metaphor for UNIX style inodes which provide meta data about a file.  While the ACL is in there, there can be other information that is fundamental to the resource too (or we may wish to add some later).
> 
> The advantage of using rel="acl" is that if you have a binary file (i.e. a picture), you can use rel="acl" for access control policies and rel="meta" to provide more information about it.
> 
> Sure, I see the advantages, even though it may be one round trip more, it's a change I could live with.  
> 
> As registration of rel="meta" has already begun, it's up to supporters of rel="acl" to join the process and try and achieve consensus.  

Who registered rel="meta", when and what was the definition given?

> 
> As henry says, I'd suggest continuing this discussion in the RWW community group, and perhaps on #dig irc, as many of the relevant people are already there.
>  
> 
> Andrei
>  
> 
> There has been previous discussions to register rel="meta" with IANA e.g.
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2010JanMar/0244.html
>  
> 
> 
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/