- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:23:05 +0100
- To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
- Cc: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
It depends (of course). Let me check I've understood you correctly. SSN should be a standard, complete with implementation experience. DUL is an optional extension that you don't want to put through the full standardisation process but you need it to be published in a stable, persistent, citable form. That would be a Rec and a Note in W3C parlance. The W3C documents will almost certainly have short URIs of https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-ssn/ https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dul/ And the namespace files are already in place of course at http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/ http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/dul/ HTH Phil. On 20/04/2016 01:19, Kerry Taylor wrote: > The SSN subgroup decided this morning that there are things (most particularly at this point, the DUL alignment) that we would like to publish *with* ssn but clearly not part of the "recommendation/standard". Can you please advise us of the appropriate mechanism for this? > > In particular with DUL, which was "built-in" to the orginal ssn we have disentangled it to make it "optional" and we prefer that part of (the previous) ssn does not carry the weight or obligations of a standard. > > --Kerry > -- Phil Archer W3C Data Activity Lead http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2016 07:23:11 UTC