- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:58:39 -0500 (EST)
- To: tbray@textuality.com, jonathan@openhealth.org, www-xml-packaging@w3.org
RDDL looks pretty cool... I wanna try it out on, say, http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace to point to stuff like the XML schema we've developed for it; it needs an update w.r.t. XML 2nd ed anyway. The way the terms in RDDL are grounded in URI space is excellent. For example, it facilitates translation to RDF. The grounding of MIME types in the IANA registry-in-the-web is cool too. (I think this approach of using souped-up HTML for smart documents is cool; see, for example, HyperRDF: Using XHTML Authoring Tools with XSLT to produce RDF Schemas http://www.w3.org/2000/07/hs78/ Sun, 13 Aug 2000 04:08:38 GMT ) But I don't see enough examples to make me confident that I can do the upgrade of the XHTML document currently at http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace conversion myself. (or maybe I'm just tired/lazy ;-) Anybody wanna tutor me thru it? By the way... RDDL looks familiar... see: HTML Resource element http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Resource/Specification Mon, 09 Dec 1996 02:46:45 GMT which captures some pre-RDF ramblings on metadata. (if you guys knew about that spec when you designed RDDL, please acknowledge it with a link.) It's cited from Web Architecture: Generic Resources TBL, 1996, 2000 http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Generic.html Fri, 08 Sep 2000 21:17:54 GMT which reminds me... there's a connection to HTTP's format negotiation semantics http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec12.html#sec12 that I'd like to see specified. Hm... gotta noodle on that... Another comment... regarding: This document defines the syntax and semantics of the Resource Directory Description Language, and also serves as a Resource Directory Description for the namespace http://www.rddl.org/. -- http://www.openhealth.org/RDDL/20010122/rddl-20010122.html That says "*the* syntax and semantics"; which, when taken literally, suggests that there shall never be another syntax/semantics associated with this namespace. Is that what you meant to say? Or do you reserve the right to revise the syntax and semantics associated with that namespace name? If so (and I suspect this is the case), please document the persitence/change policy for that namespace; for example policies, please see: URIs for W3C namespaces http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri Thu, 21 Dec 2000 18:41:28 GMT especially the section Template policy http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri#Template A simple policy like subject to change without notice suffices, though I suspect something more like The specification of this namespace is subject to change; in the case of substantive change, the editors intend to notify the users of this technology via the xml-dev forum at least one week in advance. is what you want. You might add news:comp.text.xml as a change notice forum for redundancy. If you're aware of any sort of changes to the spec that would motivate you to choose a new namespace name, (e.g. backwards-incompatible changes, etc.) please point those out too. [Feel free to forward this message to xml-dev; I still haven't figured out how to subscribe to it without my inbox becoming unmanageable. Sorry. I do try to read the archives now and again, especially when xmlhack.com etc. highlights something. If the maintainers have some way of giving me posting privileges without delivering all the mail to me, that would make my life easier.] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2001 03:35:26 UTC