[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: thoughts on linked XRD rel value
I believe it was generally agreed upon that we need to come up with a new rel value for linked XRDs. Here's some of my thoughts on that... Do we simply reuse the XRD XML namespace[0]? I'm thinking no... it's just bad practice, and we may eventually need to define other rel values in the spec (not likely, but still). The OASIS guidelines for URI design[1] dictate that URIs (other than XML namespaces) should start with "http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/". I'm figuring we'll need to add an "xrd" path segment under that, as well as a "rel" (or "relation") segment. There's no need to version these values as far as I know. So I'm thinking of something along the lines of (in no particular order): http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/rel/xrd http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/rel/linked http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/rel/linked-xrd http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/rel/equivalent Any thoughts on this? Suggestions for alternate rel values we could tack onto the end there? +/- 1 on any of the above URIs? Thanks, will [0]: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/xri/xrd-1.0 [1]: http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/namingGuidelines/resourceNaming.html#URI-Design
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]