New opportunities for linked data nose-following is a blog post from the W3C about three (3) new IETF RFCs.
Well, or at least two of them. As of my 8:55 PM local, 2010-07-08, “Defining Well-Known URIs” has the following URI, http://www.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-05. Err, that doesn’t look right.
When it didn’t resolve I thought perhaps it was a redirect.
Nothing that complicated, just a bad URI. I got the IETF “404: Page Not Found” page.
Oh, the correct URI? Defining Well-Known URIs, http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5785.txt.
So, what is a well-known URI?
A well-known URI is a URI [RFC3986] whose path component begins with
the characters “/.well-known/”, and whose scheme is “HTTP”, “HTTPS”,
or another scheme that has explicitly been specified to use well-
known URIs.Applications that wish to mint new well-known URIs MUST register
them, following the procedures in Section 5.1.
Wait for it….
5.1. The Well-Known URI Registry
This document establishes the well-known URI registry.
Well-known URIs are registered on the advice of one or more
Designated Experts (appointed by the IESG or their delegate), with a
Specification Required (using terminology from [RFC5226]). However,
to allow for the allocation of values prior to publication, the
Designated Expert(s) may approve registration once they are satisfied
that such a specification will be published.
Well, that’s a relief! We are going to have Designated Expert(s) sitting in judgment over “well-known” URIs.
We just narrowly escaped being able to judge for ourselves what are URIs worth treating as “well-known” or not.
Good thing we have TBL, the W3C and Designated Experts to keep us safe.
*******
Update: 2010-07-09
I was worried that since the “Defining Well-known URIs” RFC was dated in April that this was some complicated spoof or joke. I even check the cross linking in the RFC but finally erred on saying it was real.
I had that judgment confirmed this morning by learning that the page “went dark” briefly last night and when I checked it this morning, the incorrect URL that I reported above has been corrected, silently.
W3C blog, goes dark, comes back with correct information, all signs that this must be genuine. Or at least it is being reported as such.
Is a “Designated Expert” (love the caps!) like a designated driver? No?
Comment by sam hunting — July 8, 2010 @ 8:45 pm
The RFC never bothers to define “well-known” nor who or what might be doing the knowing. Beyond that it states that user agents cannot expect anything particular at the “well-known” location, nor how to discern any URIs that might be hiding there. In short, what is purported to be well-known is actually almost completely unknowable.
One would hate to ask the obvious question “what then is the nature of that knowing?” as that might lead to the next RFC: “Defining Unknown URIs”
Very Rumsfeldian.
Comment by murray altheim — July 9, 2010 @ 8:32 am
Murray,
I went looking for any substantive discussion of this RFC and did stumble across: IESG Announcement on RFC on this RFC.
That would have been a useful RFC. I wonder what went wrong?
An RFC for that purpose should declare a name and location, like root and a name, such as site-meta.txt.
Instead, we got a registry with experts, oh my!
Comment by Patrick Durusau — July 9, 2010 @ 9:11 am
Sam,
I think some at the W3C have decided they are the “designated driver” for the web. (I say some because the ones I know personally remain committed to a non-authoritarian vision of the web.)
As Princess Leia said: “The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.”
Comment by Patrick Durusau — July 9, 2010 @ 9:21 am
Patrick,
I’m wondering whether this proposal is going to scale. Well-known is, after all, a rather capacious term. Here’s a list of its synonyms from an online thesaurus:
VIP
accepted
acclaimed
accustomed
applauded
archetypal
aristocratic
arresting
arrestive
august
beautiful
big name
big
big-gun
big-league
big-name
big-time
blatant
bright
brilliant
button-down
capital
celeb
celebrated
celebrious
champion
coincident
collective
commanding
commonplace
communal
communistic
community
commutual
congruous
conjoint
conjunct
consequential
conspicuous
constant
consummate
corporate
correct
correspondent
current
customary
dazzling
decorous
definitive
delightful
dignified
distinguished
distingué
dominant
effulgent
elevated
eminent
enjoyable
especial
esteemed
esthetic
everyday
exalted
excellent
exemplary
expected
extraordinary
famed
famous
fashionable
fine
finest
first-rate
flagrant
flashy
flawless
foremost
formal
garish
general
generic
glaring
glitzy
glorious
gorgeous
grand
gratifying
great
habitual
heavenly
heroic
high
high-powered
high-ranking
highly regarded
honored
ideal
illustrious
immortal
important
imposing
in common
in established usage
in limelight
in spotlight
influential
intermutual
jazzy
joint
large
laureate
leading
leonine
like
lionized
lionlike
lofty
loud
magnificent
majestic
marked
marvelous
master
masterly
memorable
mighty
much-publicized
mutual
name
noble
nonpareil
notable
noted
noteworthy
notorious
number one
numero uno
of note
ordinary
orthodox
outstanding
page-oner
paradigmatic
paramount
peerless
perfect
plain
pleasurable
pointed
popular
powerful
predominant
preeminent
prestigious
prevailing
prevalent
prime
prominent
proper
public
quintessential
radiant
rank
ranking
reciprocal
recognized
red-letter
redoubted
regular
remarkable
renowned
reputable
resplendent
revered
ritual
routine
royal
salient
screaming
shared
shining
showy
signal
significant
singular
social
socialistic
special
splashy
splendid
square
standard
star
stately
stereotyped
stick out like sore thumb
storied
straight
striking
sublime
superb
superior
superstar
talked about
talked of
time-honored
tony
top
top-notch
traditional
tralatitious
triumphant
typical
unforgettable
united
universal
up there
usual
venerable
vintage
w. k.
well-known
well-known
well-known
widespread
wonderful
wonted
What I’m thinking — and I’m hoping this modest proposal will be taken in the spirit in which it is intended — is that finer granularity could be achieved by slightly altering the proposal to include URLs like:
/.well-known/VIP
/.well-known/notorious
/.well-known/unforgettable
and so forth. Increased granularity would also permit more accurate routing to the appropriate Designated Expert during the allocation process and, indeed, would permit the utilization of many, many more Designated Experts (for the “splashy,” the “vintage,” the “tralatitious” subsets of well-known-ness, for example).
Comment by sam hunting — July 9, 2010 @ 9:50 am