W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2017

w3c and ISO standards - why did I pay for the standard?

From: Chris Leighton <chris.leighton@uwa.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 09:47:53 +0800
To: "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <828152E9D90AEE45A489CC38D9C7B27401D832B2DF3A@IS-WIN-382.staffad.uwa.edu.au>
Dear all,

After searching a number of w3c email archives and elsewhere I organised to pay an ISO standards reseller for a licence to:

ISO/IEC 40260:2011 - Information technology -- W3C Web Services Addressing 1.0 - Metadata

which resulted in a strange path to the public web page:
So, although many of you may have known of this, for the others, don't bother paying. Lesson learned.
It is interesting to note that there was no mention of ISO via 'w3c search' or mention of ISO in the w3c page.
Is anyone aware of anything published where other w3c standards have been 'secretly' co-opted into ISO standards, it may save us some cash-ola.

From: Chris Leighton
Sent: Thursday, 19 January 2017 1:41 PM
To: 'semantic-web@w3.org'
Subject: Why semantic markup on public web pages in 2017

Dear professional colleagues,

the reason for Dublin Core mark-up being added to very public and trafficked pages is being called into question where I work. I am writing to ask for your thoughts and any references as to why it should be included, assuming data will be of a high standard, or why it isn't needed.

Please feel free to write to me here, or if perhaps too basic for all, off-thread. With yours and reading of WCAG 2 (AA), ISOs and assumptions on search engine algorithms I'll write a paper for discussion at my end. We call it metadata here.

Many thanks in advance.


Received on Friday, 3 February 2017 01:48:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:49 UTC