- From: John J Barton <johnjbarton@johnjbarton.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:28:30 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Paul Kinlan <paulkinlan@google.com>, Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>, James Hawkins <jhawkins@google.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > There's no difference between two people coming up with the name "foo" and > two people coming up with the name "http://webintents.org/foo", unless > you're saying you're confident that people won't use the prefix the spec > uses for its verbs for their verbs. I don't think this claim makes sense. As a developer I have no way to know if 'foo' is used by anyone else on the Internet, but it would be trivial to check "http://webintents.org/foo". > > But this is a non-problem. In practice, we have plenty of examples of > spaces where conflicts don't happen despite not having used long names > such as URLs. For example: > > - rel="" values in HTML > - element names in HTML > - MIME type names > - scheme names I believe all of these examples have one or more central name controls. The rel example in particular provides a counter example to using simple uncontrolled verbs: http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-rel-values Multiple naming authorities, layered on wiki, and still messy. > > >> A verb on its own will imply that it is a web intents verb managed by >> the webintents project and all the documentation for that will live >> under webintents, which means we would then need to think about >> standardisation and stewardship for the entire namespace. > > I don't see why. Just have a wiki page that people can list their verbs on > and then point to their documentation. A wiki is not comparable to the controlled naming systems in the four examples you give above. A wiki is a free for all that works great when there is no money involved. A Web system involving 'share' along with images, audio, and video will have money involved. I think the intent names need a controlled namespace, either centralized like your examples or decentralized as in the original proposal. URLs need not be the format. Note the Firefox extension developers use domain@name format for unique ids. jjb
Received on Sunday, 25 September 2011 17:29:00 UTC