[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Nicolas LEHUEN wrote:
<snip/>
> And maybe because there are people who agree with {meta-data resource
> directory} + doctype PI + XML Catalog, but don't think RDDL is a good
> candidate for {meta-data resource directory}, given its namespace centric
> legacy, its jumble of human readable documentation and links to resources
> which is unmaintenable and copy-paste prone, and its use of not less than
> three different technologies and namespaces (I thought this was supposed to
> be understood by so-called 'stupid web developers') ?
Well, if we've narrowed the list of objections down to just those you've
mentioned, then we've made progress. There have been some rather wild
proposals, here, that ventured pretty far afield from just the issues
you mention. I think my extended link proposal adequately addresses the
namespace-centric aspect, but it's pretty clear I'm a lone voice on this
count. I really don't understand why some object so strenuously with
combining machine-readable metadata with human readable documentation.
Do folks object to documentation annotations in schemas? What about
embedding RDF metadata in web pages? Oh well. I won't push that debate.
My proposal, though, did put forth a syntax that could be embedded in
human readable documentation or not. Either way works. (In the latter
case, it would just be a linkbase. But I personally very much like the
idea of keeping human readable documentation at the end of a namespace
URI.)
I hope the 'stupid web developers' phrase wasn't in reference to my
post. I used the term "average web developer", not "stupid web
developers". My post was in no sense intended to be derogatory.
> Provided that I'm not FORCED to use or write RDDL documents in the future, I
> can live with that.
Which is why I think a packaging approach like I suggested is important.
Ultimately, the end user has to be in control and should make the
decision of what resources to use and where to obtain them. And they
should have a convenient mechanism by which they can share resources
with others that relate to namespaces and/or doctypes they do not own.
Maybe it's time to give this a rest. (Or maybe I just need a rest.) I'll
let others have the last word on this at this point if they wish.
Cheers.
|
