- From: Andreas Deller <andreasdeller@yahoo.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 06:27:45 -0800 (PST)
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Dear w3 members I work for PharmaSoft, a firm that develops applications for the medical sector. We are currently developing a new information system that should include precise information about drugs. RDF with its structured metadata is therefore an interesting approach to consider. Concerning PICS, I read the following on your site http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-rdf-schema/: >The vocabulary that appears in a PICS-1.1 label is a mixture of descriptions of the service providing the rating, >data having to do with the mechanics of transporting the ratings, descriptions of the ratings themselves, and >descriptions of the target resource. The vocabulary associated with the transport mechanics (error, for) are not >included here. The generic keyword is handled by the RDF aboutURIPrefix mechanism. Two deprecated >PICS-1.1 options (signature-RSA-MD5 and MIC-MD5) are omitted from this vocabulary. Security techniques seem to be left behind. Since reliability on medical information is paramount, we must have some means to ensure that the information found on a site is valid. I have only found vague thoughts about digital signatures (DS) in your documens, but nothing concrete. Are you planning to include DSig1.0 or the med-PICS system into RDF? Or are you planning something different? Are there specs on the Web I have missed? Your information would help me very much to choose the right approach to my task. Best regards, A. Deller _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Monday, 2 November 1998 09:26:38 UTC