- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:41:41 +0100
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbrickley@gmail.com>, carl@media.org, webmaster@web.resource.org, www-archive@w3.org, tbaker@tbaker.de, ivan@w3.org, ben@adida.net, ml@gondwanaland.com
Aaron Swartz wrote: >> Do you plan to keep this domain renewed indefinitely, and keep using >> web.resource.org for Creative Commons? > > resource.org was, of course renewed. I was talking about the future, not the past. All I could determine from whois was that it appeared to be at risk of expiring within less than a year. Since Swoogle reports web.resource.org as underpinning 6.77% of all SW/RDF docs in its index, it seemed worth nudging the various responsible parties. My email wasn't meant as a criticism, just a friendly nudge since it's easy for these tasks and roles to get tangled up. > If Carl was no longer interested > in it, I'd be happy to pick it up. I do believe there's an email from > him in the record promising to delegate web.resource.org to us in > perpetuity. I don't know what CC plans to do about future namespaces > but changing old ones seems to be a bad idea. I'm happy to answer more > specific questions, but your email was kind of vague. Hope the above makes things clearer. Basically, please - between you, somehow - do something that gives the wider community confidence that the domain name underpinning CC URIs won't go back into the great melting pot in the sky. I was pretty sure it's all in hand, ... but thought it worth the risk of annoying you all. FWIW I quite agree re changing namespace URIs. It really causes a lot of hassle for consumer apps, so is only worth doing when there is a substantial alteration in usage/meaning. cheers, Dan
Received on Monday, 19 February 2007 18:42:18 UTC