- From: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:35:01 +0200
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 1:23 PM David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > > On 10/11/22 20:53, Pat McBennett wrote: > > [The slightly reduced efficiency of a slash IRI] is a price well > > worth paying . . . [for] a single, simple piece of *guidance* > > to follow . . . . > > +1 > > > [Complex guidance] is precisely what results in newbies running > > screaming to the hills... :) > > +1 > > To reap the benefit of this lengthy discussion -- i.e., to prevent > it from being viewed as merely bike shedding -- I suggest that this > guidance (to use slash IRIs) be written up as an RDF Community Group > "Best Practice" document published on the W3C website. That should > give it sufficient search engine mojo for people to easily find > it. And -- *after* the up-front-clear-and-simple guidance -- the > document can also summarize the rationale for that guidance, and also > summarize reasons why hash IRIs might occasionally be used instead. What effect will such Best Practice have on the thousands of vocabularies already out there in the wild? > > Thanks, > David Booth > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2022 11:35:24 UTC