Re: [RSS-DEV] Poll/vote proposal: YahooGroups / RSS 1.0 namespace PURL ->

Hi Dan,

I think it's a good idea and an honnor for RSS 1.0 to be hosted on the 
W3C Web site but I am wondering under which licence it will be published.

Will it it covered (or absorbed) by a general licence applying to 
documents published on the W3C web site or can it keep its current 
licence unaltered?



Dan Brickley wrote:

> RSS 1.0 WG,
> The Yahoogroups web service, to which the PURL for the RSS 1.0 namespace
> URI, currently redirects, now requires cookies.
> This makes it tricky for the XHTML/RDDL/RDFSchema document at that URI to
> be dereferenced by automated tools.
> I copy below a quick sanity-check exchange w/ Rael. I have mirrored our
> namespace document at so that it is accessible without cookies. I
> propose that we reconfigure the PURL server to point to this URI instead
> of to yahoogroups, at least for the main RSS 1.0 URI. I'll propose a poll
> to that effect once we've had time to discuss any possible complications
> or alternatives. If the poll is positive, we can take it to a WG vote.
> I'll keep this sync'd with any changes to the master copy which currently
> resides on I'm happy to host such RSS-related docs at
> W3C (loosly under the RDF Interest Group banner, ie. this isn't about
> going standards-track at W3C). However at W3C we don't yet have the kind
> of easy file-sharing tools offered by Yahoo, and I'm wary of creating a
> bottleneck for the kind of collaboration we've achieved through the use
> of Yahoo's (advertisement-strewn) Web services. We do however take URI
> longevity pretty seriously, so I'm happy to offer the WG
> as a URI that
> might redirect to, or that tool developers might
> make use of.
> We could probably copy a bunch of the other docs from the WG filespace on
> yahoogroups to W3C (eg. the modules), and it may be that the workings of
> the PURL server might require this for PURLs that begin with the same URI;
> I'd need to check.  Perhaps someone more familiar with the PURL service
> could comment? (EricM?)
> So I propose a poll (and then vote), with draft text as follows:
> (hmm, I've not done one of these before. sorry if this sounds po-faced!)
> [[
> The RSS 1.0 WG accepts the offer to host some or all of the RSS 1.0 PURL
> redirections on the W3C's Web site. This constitutes an informal collaboration
> between the RSS 1.0 WG and the W3C RDF / Semantic Web Interest Group; the
> continued management of the RSS 1.0 specification and associated
> extensions remains with the RSS 1.0 Working Group. The motivation for this
> collaboration is to offer cookie and advert-free access to key RSS 1.0
> documents for the Web community and their automated tools and services.
> The WG also notes that the proposed PURL change is not final, and that
> the RSS 1.0 PURLs can be redirected elsewhere in the future.
> Proposed redirection changes:
> Current:
> Proposed:
> Other PURL redirections: to be discussed/proposed?? (in this poll/vote??
> or subsequently?? I suggest "at the discretion of the WG chair", ie. leave
> this decision to the chair rather than vote on each/every doc URI).
> ]]
> (end of draft poll/vote text)
> I'm hoping this should be reasonably uncontroversial, and that we can get
> our PURL working again asap. If I've misjudged and this looks like a
> clumsy yet sinister W3C takover attempt, or if others rush forward
> offering to host the doc(s), maybe it'll take longer.
> Comments to the list please; I'll see what folks think and refine and
> initiate a poll over the next few days. I'll ping the RDF Interest Group
> list too once RSS-DEV has had a digest the proposal.
> cheers,
> Dan

Rendez-vous a Paris pour les Electronic Business Days 2002.
Eric van der Vlist   

Received on Friday, 11 January 2002 09:20:39 UTC