W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2014

Re: W3C URN scheme 'root' doesn't exist?

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 14:18:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAE1ny+5sv_xgfN7ZGKbaNyXRAV+dqjK=-zxHKMppTVZJhuip_A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
In general, URNs by virtue of not resolving, are kinda useless, so I'd
go for Silvia's approach.

The only benefit of URNs is that the IANA registry should be
permanent, but given we're dealing with W3C specs and W3C *should*
last a long time, I see no problems with using HTTP URIs here.

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> You could also use these, if you prefer their description here:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#attr-track-kind-subtitles
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#attr-track-kind-captions
> etc
>
> Silvia.
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
> <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How is this better than simply referencing the values as published in the spec:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#dom-texttrack-kind-subtitles
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#dom-texttrack-kind-captions
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#dom-texttrack-kind-descriptions
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#dom-texttrack-kind-chapters
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#dom-texttrack-kind-metadata
>>
>> All of these already have identifying URLs and they resolve to
>> something that is actually meaningful.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Silvia.
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:25 AM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>> Hi guys
>>>
>>> can I propose this in an MPEG contribution?  Would the W3C follow through and formally reserve/define the URI form?
>>>
>>> On May 12, 2014, at 7:24 , David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 12, 2014, at 15:43 , Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/05/2014 14:16 , David Singer wrote:
>>>>>> Actually, you are right, DASH requires it be a URI, so if W3C prefers
>>>>>> to use a URL over a URN, even for something that is a name, that is
>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will stay well clear of the landmine discussion about whether locators are the naming mechanism or not, but if you think this is an acceptable option please file a bug against HTML (I'm copying Silvia who generally handles media stuff).
>>>>>
>>>>> We can mint identifiers of the type http://www.w3.org/ns/whatever-name without Director approval, all we need is to say so and add a few HTML documents at the end of those URLs (which I can do easily). If you think that identifiers with another structure would be good I'm just as happy but we need the Director's approval.
>>>>
>>>> OK, so
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/html-track-kind/<a valid value of the kind attribute for an HTML track element>
>>>>
>>>> would be entirely fine.  Maybe the last / should be # ?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/html-track-kind#<a valid value of the kind attribute for an HTML track element>
>>>>
>>>> or don’t namespaces use #’s?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The policy on URL naming assignment between specs is here:
>>>>>
>>>>>   http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
>>>>
>>>> cool.  I think that kinds are not year or spec-version-specific, and likely to stay stable.
>>>>
>>>> Could this be part of the HTML spec.?
>>>>
>>>> “When a self-identifying HTML kind value is needed in a context outside HTML, the form http://www.w3.org/ns/html-track-kind/<a valid value of the kind attribute for an HTML track element> may be used.”
>>>>
>>>> ??
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
>>>>
>>>> David Singer
>>>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>>>
>>>
>>> David Singer
>>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>>
>
Received on Monday, 23 June 2014 12:19:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:57:02 UTC