W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > February 2017

Re: [Minutes] Plenary call - 2017-02-22

From: Rob H Warren <warren@muninn-project.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:06:25 -0500
Cc: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, public-sdw-wg@w3.org, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
Message-Id: <85B05FDF-12CD-4B18-A706-C42C5223ACE2@muninn-project.org>
To: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
I would like to add that namespaces are convenience shorthands in local documents and have no global meaning except when dealing with some hard-coded parsers. 

>>  KJanowic: look at prefix.cc for how people look up ontologies
>>  ... this is the common way
>>  ... one namespace
>>  ... we need to keep to the common pattern
> 
> @Krzysztof, you have often referred to prefix.cc in your argumentation from what I can read. I'm not comfortable with this. First, prefix.cc has no official status, no authority, and may no longer be maintained. It was discontinued for a moment and Richard said that he is not interested in investing time on it.
> 
> This was a social experiment. Anyone can spam the system, associating any URI with any prefix and adding +1 to increase the rank. This is for alleviating all those known problems that vocabularies such as VANN and VOAF and tools such as LOV have been created, so that a vocabulary author declares what should be the preferred prefix / namespace for the published vocabulary. I don't think that the functioning of a system such as prefix.cc is relevant to the discussion of whether one, two or more namespaces should be adopted for SSN.
> Best regards.
> Raphaël
Received on Monday, 27 February 2017 22:28:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 27 February 2017 22:28:39 UTC