Re: [office-metadata] Binding proposal

["Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com>]

Thanks for the suggestions Michael.

A couple of comments:

On Mar 20, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 -  
Hamburg wrote:

> So, it is a dilemma. On the hand, we need stable and unique ids to  
> be able to share metadata.

The issue is that this is not only (or I think even necessarily  
mainly) about sharing metadata. It's about being able to make any  
statements about a document.

> And on the other hand, we cannot ensure that these ids are  
> maintained properly, but need the help from our users, that again  
> have to understand what the id is for.
>
> So, to get out of this dilemma I would like to suggest is we make  
> the use of global and unique ids optional. That is, the user itself  
> may decide whether she or he want to share the metadata in the  
> document. If the user wants to share the metadata, then the  
> document gets a unique id, and the user itself is responsible for  
> making sure that the document is only edited by applications (or  
> users) that are aware of the id and understand what it is about. Of  
> cause, office application may and should assist the user in  
> maintaining the id.
>
> If the user does not want to share the metadata, then the document  
> does not get an id, and the metadata in the document does not get a  
> meaning outside the scope of the document.

I like the idea of giving users control over this sort of thing, but  
I don't think the question of sharing is equivalent to that of  
identification. For example, one could have a URI for the document  
that was stable and unique, and still decide you don't want to share  
the metadata.

I really don't think the document URI should be optional. I think  
what should be optional is if a user would like to use their own (say  
http) URI, rather than some default urn:uuid. It should also in  
general be optional whether they want to change the URI (with warning  
notes!).

Bruce