Actually, my recollection is that EPSG & OGC proposed to include version numbers, and several of us argued against it and
managed to convince them. I would have to dig up old emails to find out for certain who was in which camp, however.
Regards,
Jeff DLB
On 2010-12-16 15:57, Lowry, Roy K. wrote:
Hi Jeff,
It's interesting to see the difference of opinion between the standards
developers (the idea of version number in URI came from the OGC URN
specification: interesting how EPSG came to a different conclusion) and those
who have to live with the consequences. The more I think about it, the more I
think you and Benno are absolutely right.
Cheers, Roy.
________________________________________
From: cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu [cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On
Behalf Of Jeff deLaBeaujardiere [jeff.delabeaujardi...@noaa.gov]
Sent: 16 December 2010 19:40
To: John Graybeal
Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Web reference to a standard name?
On 2010-12-14 12:56, John Graybeal wrote:
Just to be crystal clear, the places where you have '16' could also have
'current' (if I understand correctly what Roy was saying about their server),
and the mmisw one could also be served with a particular version ID (analogous
to the NERC example).
I think it is of the utmost importance to have a URI that does not include a
version number
and always provides the latest answer. Otherwise you have a proliferation of
identifiers
mean the same thing but appear to change every time the overall vocabulary is
updated. You
can also have a version-specific entry if desired.
There were similar discussions regarding identifiers for coordinate reference
system
identifiers from EPSG (European Petroleum Survey Group), and it was fortunately
recognized that a version-less URI was essential.
-Jeff
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata--
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.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
