W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > March 2005

RE: [ALL] proposed resolution httpRange-14

From: Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 17:27:47 +0100
To: "SWBPD" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Cc: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Message-ID: <FOEHKIENIPCJNPNFKGJNKEHMGIAB.pepper@ontopia.net>

I am assuming that this proposal will be on the agenda for
the telecon on Thursday.

Jeremy mentions below that some people might have concerns
about the wording of the proposed message to the TAG (assuming
the resolution is approved by the WG) and suggests that we
discuss this by email before the telecon.

I would like to state that I find nothing to object to in
his draft and would appreciate hearing from anyone who does.

Since I will be calling in from Europe on my own dime, I
would also appreciate if this item and the RDFTM Survey could
be early in the telecon agenda.

Thanks.

Steve

--
Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>
Chief Strategy Officer, Ontopia
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3
Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps 1.0)
 

| -----Original Message-----
| From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
| [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jeremy Carroll
| Sent: 17. mars 2005 19:12
| To: SWBPD
| Subject: [ALL] proposed resolution httpRange-14
| 
| 
| 
| 
| I propose that
| 
| an http URI without a hash MAY be used to identify an RDF property
| 
| - where MAY is understood in terms of RFC 2119
| - and identify is understood in terms of RFC 3986
| 
| 
| 
| =====
| 
| I suggest that if the resolution holds the chair should send a message 
| transmitting this resolution to the TAG. A possible draft message is:
| 
| =====
| 
| The Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment WG have resolved 
| unaminously that:
| 
|     - an http URI without a hash MAY be used to identify an RDF property
| 
| where MAY is understood in terms of RFC 2119
| and identify is understood in terms of RFC 3986
| 
| Our primary concern is:
|      - deployed semantic web applications such as Dublin Core [1],
| Friend-of-a-friend [2], Creative Commons [3], Adobe XMP [4], RSS 1.0 [5]
| that use such URIs
| 
| Other important concerns are:
|      - the practical difficulty of using '#' namespace URIs for large
| vocabularies such as wordnet
|      - the impossibility of doing server side redirects on '#' URIs
| 
| 
| This issue is impacting the work of the following SWBPD WG Task Forces:
|      - Vocabulary Management
|      - Porting Thesauri
|      - WordNet
|      - RDF/Topic Maps Interoperability
| (see WG homepage for TF list and more information [6])
| 
| 
| The SWBPD WG hope that the TAG will be able to soon reach closure on
| your issue httpRange-14, noting the current SW practice embodied in our
| resolution, and we offer to work with you as appropriate.
| 
| [1] DC URI
| [2] FOAF URI
| [3] CC URI
| [4] Adobe XMP URI
| [5] RSS 1.0 URI
| [6] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/#Tasks
| 
| 
| =====
| 
| My understanding of the usual practice is that the chair has discretion 
| in the exact wording of such messages, and the WG does not usually 
| micromanage the wording (but may).
|  From the discussion at the f2f, there may be comments about the tone of 
| my draft; it would be beneficial to have such discussion, or discussion 
| of the actual proposed resolution, by e-mail before next week's telecon 
| (assuming this proposal will be put then).
| 
| =====
| 
| I will be unable to attend on Thursday, if Brian is also unable to 
| attend I appoint the chair as my proxy to propose and vote on this issue.
| 
| 
| Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 22 March 2005 16:39:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:07 UTC