[Accessforall] Minutes of AccessForAll Meeting on 2012-01-31

Andy Heath andyheath at axelrod.plus.com
Fri Feb 10 20:33:58 UTC 2012


akh:comments edited in below

>> I believe a URL gives a means to access a resource
> Right
>> - subtly different from where the resource came from (not that that
>> has impact for the matter here).
> actually the URL should lead directly to the location of the registry
> that the info came from.

akh: Not necessarily - e.g. local cache (maybe held in a proxy - 
transparently to the user) is a good way to speed stuff up (and answers 
Colin's point from an earlier mail - having extensive references that 
*seem* to go out to the web is not necessarily inefficient). In fact 
that might be one way to have an abstract API that doesn't know whether 
some facility is on the device or remote. We adopted this approach in 
EU4ALL, a European project I worked on that implemented 24751. URL's are 
not always what they might seem.

>
>> I don't think the URL/URI distinction is important at this point but
>> it might become so after we considered how people and tools interact
>> with "the" registry. It is easily revisited later.
> A URI SHOULD also lead you directly there. But it would require that
> there are universal servers (e.g. universal name server for a URN) and
> they don't exist.
> so for theoretical discussions URI is fine. But now that I think about
> it -- I think we should stick with URL so it will actually work.

akh:That's fine - its easy to change later if needed.

>>
>> I called it ""the" registry" because it occurred to me while I was
>> thinking about the URL/URI question is that there are ways to do this
>> where there are federated registries (which is one way to filter
>> culturally for example) - but in my mind we are talking about a single
>> registry here - as specified in 1.
>
> I think we will have one COMMON TERMS registry for GPII - but there will
> be many since each company or creator can create new TERMs for their
> product(s) and they will not be in th COMMON TERMS registry
> We are setting up a mechanism for companies to store them next to (but
> not in) the COMMON TERMs registry but that is for convenience - not
> required. Companies can put their terms anywhere they like -- and the
> URL would point to them. At least that is the current plan -- subject to
> modification with better ideas. We are implementing one now however
> since we need it in the next 60 days to be operational.
>

akh:sounds ok.


Cheers

andy
-- 
__________________
Andy Heath
http://axelafa.com



More information about the Accessforall mailing list