thoughts on linked XRD rel value

[Will Norris <will@willnorris.com>]

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