[auscope-geosciml] Mistake in the svn use.
carlo.cipolloni at isprambiente.it
Wed Aug 25 12:30:59 EDT 2010
I don't who managing the GeoSciML schema trunk (I suppose Ollie!). I had to
set up again the SVN directories, because I had to re-install the SVN
software (was corrupted) and when have managed the SVN I have made a mistake
that is updating with me SVN repository directory. So please could you
remove the wrong parts? Thanks and sorry again to all.
Da: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au
[mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] Per conto di Sen, Marcus
Inviato: domenica 22 agosto 2010 13:00
A: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Oggetto: [auscope-geosciml] URI schemes
Some comments on URI schemes before I go on holiday :-)
Referring to the
The host part of HTTP URIs should be tightly coupled to the authority
governing the resources in question. It is up to that authority to register
the host domain (possibly using sub-domains) and undertake to maintain it.
It looks like http://resource.geosciml.org/ is being settled on for CGI. The
CGI domain should have things defined by CGI like CGI standard
Other things like features or organisation specific classifierScheme's might
be created by any geological survey organisation in the world, commerical
geological companies, university researchers etc. and responsibility for
defining unique identifiers for them should lie with the organisation which
creates them. It is their responsibility to register a domain for defining
the things for which they are the responsible authority. The current CGI URN
scheme has an authority segment which is an ad-hoc organisation acronym
which has worked OK while there are just a handful of us doing test beds but
this is not scaleable to all the organisations we would like to be using
GeoSciML to deliver geologic features and there is no reason why we would
want to make organisations delivering features in GeoSciML format register
with CGI anyway.
Individual organisations will have to consider CGI specific and wider
contexts in deciding on their URI construction policy. For example, BGS
might need to decide that it should create and maintain a
http://resource.bgs.ac.uk/ domain for CGI related and other resources it is
responsible for but, as a UK public sector organisation, might also need to
consider whether some of it's data will need URIs in a data.gov.uk domain.
It is worth-while to discuss and agree some shared best-practice for naming
the components of the URI path following the host part which might be shared
by people in the geoscience community (or wider if possible) for the
purposes of making them human-friendly. Machine processing of URIs should
not rely on knowledge of the path structure. Organisations delivering
geological data may also want to supply other kinds of data with URIs which
may have nothing to do with CGI standards and they probably won't want to
devote a special domain to CGI only resources and may or may not be happy to
name from the root part of the path information according to a CGI pattern.
Using a CGI specific identifying top-level part like /uri-cgi would increase
the chances but not guarantee this. The idea of comparing URIs for identity
by removing the host part and comparing the rest of the string is completely
outside all the principles of URI use and should not be pursued.
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Nessun virus nel messaggio in arrivo.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 9.0.851 / Database dei virus: 271.1.1/3088 - Data di rilascio:
More information about the GeoSciML