- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:35:55 -0700
- To: Social Interest Group <public-social-interest@w3.org>
hello elf. On 2015-04-10 05:05, Social Interest Group Issue Tracker wrote: > ISSUE-4 (Living Vocabs): management of 'living' vocabularyies similar to microformats.org and schema.org [Social Vocabularies] > http://www.w3.org/Social/InterestGroup/track/issues/4 this is a good one, and an important one if we take extensibility seriously. the main thing here is to have a robust and predictable change model. for example: if we have profiles (as proposed in https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/pull/92), then that means we could have URIs for identifying vocabularies. that might be useful (it certainly is for us as we're playing around with AS1 extensions). but then the important question is about stability: is the vocabulary that is associated with such an identifier stable? if not, what is the process to go through a) to change it, and b) to find out about those changes. IANA's registries are one way to approach this, and the occasionally competing HTML5 registries are a slightly different take on the same issue. in the end, the differences aren't huge, but relevant. it definitely would be good to have a model and to document it, so that implementations that want to behave well know what that actually entails. cheers, dret. -- erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |
Received on Friday, 10 April 2015 17:36:21 UTC