W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > May 2015

Re: Sustainable Codes vs Volatile URIs Re: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities

From: Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 14:13:25 -0300
Message-ID: <CAHEREts-xSesguo+hBLaBbFe4W4dV=yKysBC5ombFPrHmMV6MQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Cc: W3C Vocabularies <public-vocabs@w3.org>

2015-05-09 13:11 GMT-03:00 Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>:

> We can agree about the "code is URN" assertion?
> I can agree ...
> But further, the universe at large can agree, and more importantly FIFA
> Football already agrees (all is right with the FIFA universe). They use 3
> Character ISO Country Codes (as Acronym Labels)to designate the Clubs.
> Governments are more particular with the Territorial Sovereignty issues, as
> they have to be.  The new US system (GENC) has some of the ISO codes, and
> many "Exceptions" - pet names, including some pet names for undisclosed
> locations.
> Here is the point: any 3 character Acronym mapping to a 2 Character
> Acronym can *always*, no exceptions, be federalized by "Degrees" (Machin's
> est. of PI/4 = ((1/4)*ATAN(1/5)-ATAN(1/239)).  The *speed* of convergence
> makes absolutely no difference to URN users.  URI "users" want speed of
> convergence bragging rights.  They should watch Football instead, they
> could probably learn something about maths, Unicodes and public
> vocabularies.
I have some difficulty here at public-vocabs@w3 because some questions are
so subjectives, but important...  ;-)

Can we use some "in deep examples"?  Please help me to show good examples,
because I, and perhaps other readers, will not understand your position
without (a little bit more) techical/formal examples... Starting with your
first paragraph,

*EXAMPLE1*:  "*FIFA codes of clubs* expressed as URNs".
  Corinthians = "urn:fifa:club:bra:corinthians" is
  Real Madrid = "urn:fifa:club:esp:real.madrid" is

So, now looking at your comments in the light of EXAMPLE1,

* all URN must design an authority, or  hierarchy of authorities.
  Example: URN LEX start with country authority (ex. "urn:lex:br" is for
Brazil law, "urn:lex:uk;wales" is for Wales law)
  The first level is the namespace autority (ex. ISSN or LEX).

* no problem if "bra" and "esp" are or not ISO codes, the autority is FIFA.
  The URN must to make sense to "FIFA users", not to an universe external
to the FIFA's namespace...

* Territorial Sovereignty issues can be achieved by namespace (as NISO
namespace in US) or
   or by "hierarchy of authorities", as URN LEX do.

... (perhaps we need more examples) ... I not see any problem (!) with URNs
and an "URN-resolver microservices architecture" to manage the demands of a

About your second paragraph: I think the same arguments (above) are valid.


> --Gannon
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 5/7/15, Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Subject: Re: Sustainable Codes vs Volatile URIs Re: URIs / Ontology for
> Physical Units and Quantities
>  To: "W3C Vocabularies" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
>  Date: Thursday, May 7, 2015, 6:42 AM
>  2015-05-07 5:36 GMT-03:00
>  Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>:
>  (...) But to put in bluntly, in many cases,
>  well-maintained codes for standardized identities
>  (languages, countries, towns, units ...) are more
>  sustainable ways to share identities than
>  URIs,
>  Perhaps
>  I am not understanding, but there are some conceptual
>  mistake?  "codes" in this sense, for me, are
>  URNs; and URNs are URIs... Incremental
>  examples:
>  *
>  "codes" are things controlled at https://github.com/datasets
>  * the code of "Avestan" is
>  "ae" in https://github.com/datasets/language-codes
>  * in my context (ex. my house or my
>  LAN) I can use my URN definition,
>   "urn:x-ok-datasets:language-codes:ae"
>       that is the "alpha2" column
>  in
> https://github.com/datasets/language-codes/blob/master/data/language-codes.csv
>    and the "URN Resolution" is the conversion from
>  "alpha2" column to the "English"
>  column.    ... And so on... In the same
>  URN-x-ok schema are many other code types,     like
>  "urn:x-ok-datasets:country-codes:us"
>  defined by https://github.com/datasets/country-codes/
>    we are not hostages of IANA, we can use URN for any
>  code. so, codes are URNs ... We can
>  agree about the "code is URN"
>  assertion?
Received on Saturday, 9 May 2015 17:13:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:40 UTC