OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tm-pubsubj-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] More grumbling

* Lars Marius Garshol
| Here it is unclear what "automated discovery" is supposed to mean.
| Discovery of what, by what means, and in what context?

* Bernard Vatant
| I suppose that means capacity for search engines to distinguish the
| "signal" of PSIs among "noise" of billions of ordinary URIs, which
| is something like SETI search. What should we look for? I agree it
| has to be more explicit.

In that case, probably what we should do is to establish some way to
assert that a certain resource contain a PSI set using XTM, RDF, and

For HTML I think we should take a close and serious look at HTML
metadata profiles. I think they would be simple enough for people to
use, yet formal and powerful enough for what we need. See
  <URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/global.html#h- >
| Indeed. We should be less fuzzy on that to reduice the noise. If we
| recommend the use of the token "psi", we maybe should recommend a
| more precise use of it, like its position in the URI string, and
| maybe recommend a whole standard structure like:
| http://psi.myorg.foo/scope/subject.html

That means you have to own a domain in order to be able to create a
PSI, and I don't think we really want that. It should be enough to own
webspace in order to be able to create a URI. So I would very much
prefer some form of structured metadata, as described above.
| IMO what we want to achieve is to allow search engines - and also
| humans - to distinguish with the less noise possible URIs who are
| declared PSIs from those who are not. Of course we will not get rid
| of all the noise, but we can put it down to a reasonable level by
| recommending a given URI structure.

Aha, so this is about humans, too, is it? I guess that means we should
come up with some text that can be put in a PSD to identify the
intention that it serve as a PSD.
| [human-interpretable, yet stable]
| Could you explain exactly where you think the contradiction lies?

I explained it below that statement: something that is meaningful to
humans is something humans are likely to want to change at some point.

* Lars Marius Garshol
| Steve's and Bernard's response to that was that in some cases you
| will know up front that this is not going to be a problem. There are
| two responses to that.
| The first is that if that were true it is still a problem that this
| paragraph provides too little guidance on how to tell those cases
| apart. To be really effective we should provide more guidance.
* Bernard Vatant
| I think the example should show that better than any abstract prose
| here.

Well, I don't think the "apples and oranges" example is actually going
to help anyone figure out when to use human-interpretable identifiers
and when not to.

And I agree that it certainly is difficult to come up with some
abstract prose that provides useful guidance on when to use meaningful
identifiers and when not to, but I am not at all convinced that doing
so is within the scope of this TC. 

I think the best we can do is to either leave this issue alone
completely, or else to write a general "best practices" document and
cover this as one of the issues there. 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC