- From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:56:40 -0700
James Graham wrote: > Given the problems with using DNS as your registry noted above and the > fact that the recommended solution to this problem is to use a small > number of registries built atop DNS that promise greater longevity than > DNS registrations can ensure, it doesn't seem unreasonable to have a > single permanent registry that provides (at least for HTML 5) a > canonical prefix:url mapping. I don't think that argument follows quite the way you frame it. Even if the recommendation is to use long-lasting registries, you can still choose the registry you want, build your own, etc... Meanwhile, the centrally registered prefixes are, well, *centrally* controlled, which is a very different architectural choice, and, where data is concerned, not as web-like as one really wants. > So instead of the use of cc:foo requiring > a deceleration of cc elsewhere in the document, cc would be declared at, > say, cc.rdfa.net and would be a globally unique prefix from the point of > view of the author. People not wanting to bother registering would just > have to use full URLs everywhere. This would seem to provide the "follow > your nose" principle you desire, remove several of the objections to > URL-based namespaces, make authoring for the common case of well known > vocabularies easier, and have only mildly different distributedness > characteristics to the current recommended practice. That said, I don't think this is a bad idea at all. In defining RDFa, we said that various host languages (HTML5, XHTML1.1, XHTML2, ...) may choose to include some built-in additional definitions, e.g. new reserved keywords in @rel. I am certainly open to considering a mechanism for pre-defined prefixes in HTML5+RDFa, as long as they are machine-discoverable by follow-your-nose (likely via the HTML5 spec doc), and as long as those prefixes can be overridden in a given document and new prefixes can be defined at will. And I appreciate this suggestion, which definitely moves the discussion forward! -Ben
Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 07:56:40 UTC