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

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

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 15:27:25 +0200
Message-ID: <53A82B3D.8020204@w3.org>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
CC: TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
On 23/06/2014 13:28 , Silvia Pfeiffer 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

I think that the fact that you're giving David a choice is part of the 
problem :)

If two systems need to refer to these in a coherent, interoperable 
manner, they should be able to do so independently of one another. I 
don't say that this is a recommendation for URNs, but it does surface 
the notion that there could be value in us stating which ought to be 
used. After that, so long as there's a reliable string, whether it's a 
URN, a given URL or another, it doesn't matter.

If your recommended best is indeed to use URLs that anchor into the spec 
(which makes sense to me) I would recommend:

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html/#attr-track-kind-subtitles

over

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#attr-track-kind-subtitles

Advantages:

   • Shorter
   • The "html" short name will continue to refer to the latest version 
of HTML whereas "html5" will possible stick to HTML 5.0.
   • You don't need to give a file name, every page in that spec looks 
at the fragment identifier and redirects to the right page (which is 
good for humans, harmless for other systems).

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 23 June 2014 13:27:43 UTC

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