- From: Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>
- Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 14:15:25 -0700
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, "'Simon Josefsson'" <jas@extundo.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
At 09:53 AM 5/1/2003 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote: >One problem with 'meta' is that it begs the question of >where the registry for the meta-tags would reside. >Where do we define what 'sha1=' means? Is this yet >another IANA registry? maybe "meta" could transport RDF statements about the URI. Something like: meta:<URI>:<default RDF schema namespace>:prop1=val1,prop2=val2,prop3=val3 I still think crypto data is less metadata about the resource, and more metadata about retrieving the resource, so I'm not sure it should be treated the same as other metadata. But if you had a secure URI using a "secure:" scheme, you could nest it inside a "meta:" scheme like above. Trevor
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 17:16:02 UTC