A bit dense - the authors seem to think that documentation is
equivalent to a core dump - and wacky for presentation details, with
every token highlighted in some distinct way - but contains a lot of
good information. They make the distinction between machine-
processable and human-readable formats - a shame they didn't choose
the latter themselves :-)
Rob
-- On Feb 1, 2008, at 3:51 AM, Norman Gray wrote:Received on 2008-02-01Z15:03:39
>
> Folks,
>
> This is probably partly relevant to the [versioning-3] discussion.
> We've referred to earlier versions of this in other local threads
> (for example Rick's message about hash and slash namespaces), and to
> the CoolURIs paper.
>
> It points to a 'configuration validator' for serving vocabularies.
>
> All the best,
>
> http://nxg.me.uk/norman/#norman
>
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> A new working draft of "Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF
>> Vocabularies" was published on 23 January, 2008. The W3C Semantic Web
>> Deployment Working Group (SWD WG) invites you to comment on this
>> document:
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-swbp-vocab-pub-20080123/
>>
>> This document describes best practice recipes for publishing
>> vocabularies or ontologies on the Web (in RDF Schema or OWL). The
>> features of each recipe are described in detail, so that vocabulary
>> designers may choose the recipe best suited to their needs. Each
>> recipe
>> introduces general principles and an example configuration for use
>> with
>> an Apache HTTP server (which may be adapted to other environments).
>> The
>> recipes are all designed to be consistent with the architecture of
>> the
>> Web as currently specified.
>>
>> W3C Working Drafts provide opportunities for public comment during
>> the
>> development of a specification. Please send comments to the public
>> mailing list: public-swd-wg-at-w3.org; please include the text "comment
>> recipes" in the subject line.
>
> --
> Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk
> eurovotech.org : University of Leicester
>