Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

identifiers for web concepts #24

Closed
dret opened this issue Sep 17, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

identifiers for web concepts #24

dret opened this issue Sep 17, 2016 · 4 comments
Assignees
@dret

Comments

@dret
Copy link
Owner

dret commented Sep 17, 2016 •
edited
Loading

what kind of identifier should web concepts have? there are probably three general design choices:

  • a simple non-URI identifier such as http-method:GET
  • a dereferencable URI such as http://webconcepts.info/concepts/http-method/GET
  • a non-dereferencable URI such as urn:webconcept:http-method:GET

all these methods have pros and cons, i'd be interested to hear opinions.
@dret dret mentioned this issue Sep 22, 2016
Closed
@dret
Copy link
Owner Author

dret commented Sep 22, 2016

particularly interesting is how the identifier translates to people adding their own concepts and values. i am considering having a registry for the concepts, and then the registry entry for the concept has to say where to look up values. does that make sense?

@dret
Copy link
Owner Author

dret commented Nov 29, 2016

currently leaning towards using the http://webconcepts.info/concepts/http-method/GET approach, which is robust (global identifier) and works as a link (dereferences to a representation).

@dret dret self-assigned this Dec 8, 2016
@dret
Copy link
Owner Author

dret commented Dec 13, 2016

this is related to #25 which will change some URIs, but overall the important aspect is to use referencable URIs as concept/value identifiers.

This was referenced Dec 15, 2016
Open
Closed
@dret
Copy link
Owner Author

dret commented Dec 31, 2016

closing this as referenceable URIs probably make the most sense and have been in use for a while now. and nobody has been asking for anything else.

@dret dret closed this as completed Dec 31, 2016
@dret dret mentioned this issue Jul 12, 2017
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@dret dret

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@dret