Format of Concept URIs

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Each Concept in a SKUA vocabulary has a URI, with or without a fragment

Question: What form should the Concept URIs take?  Is it necessary to mandate a 
form?

Suggested resolution (Norman): The labels have a URI composed of a namespace 
URI plus a 
fragment.  The namespace URI is dereferenceable to a page giving information 
about the 
vocabulary (such as the standard document or draft), and is thus ivoa.net or at 
some other 
domain, depending on the document's standardisation status.  The fragment is 
composed of 
characters from the set [a-zA-Z0-9] only (ie, `CamelCase'), with the actual 
fragment labels 
chosen so that there are no duplicates.  The labels should have some mnemonic 
value (for the 
sake of developers' ease), but be clearly not usable in place of proper labels. 

Consideration 1: opacity: there are arguments in favour of making the fragment 
completely 
opaque (for example, just a numeric ID), and of making it much more like the 
printable label

Original issue reported on code.google.com by norman.x.gray on 17 Dec 2007 at 7:51

[GoogleCodeExporter]

s/SKUA/SKOS/ (SKUA is a different project...)

Original comment by norman.x.gray on 18 Dec 2007 at 9:59

• Added labels: ****
• Removed labels: ****

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This appears to be resolved, since the on-list discussion on it has stopped, 
and the resolution above (originally 
formulated by Rick), effectively incorporated into the document.

Original comment by norman.x.gray on 5 Feb 2008 at 4:13

• Changed state: Resolved
• Added labels: ****
• Removed labels: ****