ISSUE-63: Metadata Architecture for the Web
Goal: determine next steps on interoperability issue
Generic approach to TAG issues
Received wisdom (webarch)
<http://example/cheese> dc:creator "Jiang Yuhe".
Consensus at risk - syntactic space threatened
Because Web URIs are reserved for their IRs, other URIs have to be used for other things. Those who find this difficult have their eyes on Web URIs.
HH: "It 's not a standard. It's on no W3C Recs. It's a W3C TAG finding, and primarily something Tim wrote in a design note that got put forth by SWEO as Note. So there's no process to go through to change it to begin with."
"... people forget to put it [the #] there when writing and cut and pasting URIs, and it's applied inconsistently across the XML and RDF universes. It puts a magic redirect in where one isn't necessary to begin with."
The interoperability issue
The interoperability issue (2)
Notational approaches, webarch vs. alternative
where you see U, pretend that you see http://example/e
|refer to document|
|<U> yielding 200 the document||[wa:isAccessedFrom "U"^^xsd:anyURI]|
<U> yielding non-description
|refer to subject|
<V> yielding 303 Location: U
<V> yielding 200 other IR
|<U> yielding description|
Can we maintain consensus?
[Discuss process here. Echoes, TAG purview, important, fatigue, etc. More technical stuff follows.]
Deeper issues (AWWSW)
What does metadata express - intent or truth?
Robin Berjon: "There shouldn't be a way of specifying dependencies external to the content or it's authoritative metadata all over again."
Media type and dependencies express intent: You can't hold me responsible if my content is interpreted in some other way.
Other metadata is objective - e.g. authorship, size.
How is metadata true?
A: Check it using GET/200.
Why would I let myself be held accountable for my referential use of someone else's http: URI, if GET/200 has authority over reference and the URI owner is in control of GET/200?
Segue to persistence discussion
Actionable persistence = a way to hold services accountable, and a system for obtaining universal consensus on what they're accountable for