Re: DAML+ONT URIs

From: Ian Horrocks ([email protected])
Date: 12/21/00


I thought we had agreed on daml+oil, not daml+ont.

I has assumed the names would be:

daml+oil.daml
daml+oil-ex.daml

On December 20, Dan Connolly writes:
> Mike Dean wrote:
> > 
> > Let's plan to use entries under
> > 
> >   http://www.daml.org/2000/12/
> > 
> > with
> > 
> >   daml+ont.daml for the namespace
> 
> Please don't include the extension in the namespace name. Just use:
> 
> 	http://www.daml.org/2000/12/daml+ont#
> 
> As to why, see
> 	http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI
> 
> Other than that, I agree.
> 
> 
> >   daml+ont-index.html for a dispatch page (HTML references
> >   to the release should generally point here)
> > 
> >   daml-ex.daml, etc.
> > 
> > This approach has the following advantages
> > 
> >   short URI for namespace
> > 
> >   keeps all files together
> > 
> >   consistency with the daml-ont release
> > 
> >   avoids the content negotiation problem with daml-ont.daml
> >   that I introduced by using daml-ont.html as the dispatch
> >   page
> 
> yup.
> 
> >   allows for the possibility of other files also being under
> >   2000/12/
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> >         Mike
> 
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> office: tel:+1-913-491-0501
> pager: mailto:[email protected]
>   (put return phone number in from/subject)


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST