From nobody Mon Dec 15 17:26:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA4D71A90A6 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:21:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rAYvDPI1YEz8 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:21:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 993461A90A9 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:21:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBG0Lt9H089719 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:21:56 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: NEW RELATION - ispartof Message-Id: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:21:55 -0800 To: link-relations@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/mTgDZw-iHlqVZB1snvRqtWghXII X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:26:42 -0800 X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 00:21:58 -0000 Relation Name: ispartof Description: Indicates that the link's content is a part of an external series. Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc Notes: n/a Application Data: n/a From nobody Mon Dec 15 17:26:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A81851A90AD for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:22:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RLUxmSAkHSuv for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:22:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A3D11A90A6 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:22:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBG0Lt9I089719 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:22:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom Message-Id: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:22:31 -0800 To: link-relations@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/YPgKBu0Uo-Rg0sbGqxqDzge-_oM X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:26:42 -0800 X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 00:22:32 -0000 Relation Name: convertedfrom Description: Refers to a source from which this material was converted. Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc Notes: n/a Application Data: n/a From nobody Mon Dec 15 21:56:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 900631ACCE1 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:56:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A8QLLqcYFyZP for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pa0-x22b.google.com (mail-pa0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A6B31ACCE0 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id kx10so13465580pab.30 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:56:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=8DuHpgeDfhqhIGckF6F9Dhe1moMJp0OCHPGZKYwOvyo=; b=bl9HjlT4GZVajRcl4SjPF78WMdfEG1s3yAePxASMGf6UjkBxHdiFgeVwNJEUIO6+Mm 4pF/r+gt2ftGSLb7gw0VTkowP7vsRB34Jbjr3JgvdWlxfRF5olUBVpqRiOVv9HX9nOJ1 +XjkZkKnLZ07SBJpfsOM59BlphokC5E5sX7WQcAouR/L3+ko33Y0rPqaphVCslqbzjKO xpGFt+gI4diBJs5A93CyC79Khhz1S2WaU4rYEf2GDlRu73JqNGT8xQYUUTjhzeSC46A/ ashpb1/W4K2WQ48bgA3FhEoTAe1Ryw5dFlRrJAPOBFUK2vxleG2rMu6sALJVYF6kyFJ0 JbJA== X-Received: by 10.66.120.201 with SMTP id le9mr49171980pab.124.1418709363059; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:56:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.6] (c-67-164-146-42.hsd1.nm.comcast.net. [67.164.146.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ug6sm11105745pab.7.2014.12.15.21.56.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 15 Dec 2014 21:56:01 -0800 (PST) References: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D257) From: Herbert Van de Sompel Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - ispartof Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:56:01 -0700 To: Paul Hoffman Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/pYB9dfRknetlOcGMISwb-lx-nQg Cc: "link-relations@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 05:56:06 -0000 Hi Paul, I was trying to figure out how the ispartof rel is semantically different fr= om the item rel, see=20 http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573 Cheers Herbert Sent from my iPad > On Dec 15, 2014, at 17:21, Paul Hoffman wrote: >=20 > Relation Name: ispartof >=20 > Description: Indicates that the link's content is a part of an > external series. >=20 > Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc >=20 > Notes: n/a >=20 > Application Data: n/a >=20 > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations From nobody Tue Dec 16 06:45:21 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DFEE1A1AEB for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:45:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ARDdH68Xge4A for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:45:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f53.google.com (mail-la0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 286C91A1B7E for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:44:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id gm9so11626411lab.12 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:44:30 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=718D6mjP2vaEdztHyPoRlnPan54FjunFP11c9hEMKeg=; b=b1a/RZJQHv2U4IXp6XO1t2HrVl2VtNgvKePZ4ZQJ3I/fif46cxCOfetM43Ty20au9V xwvpPV2PzqiY+rxt2OMKBLB4tfBEIeyN8E1E1/MpwcKRzJ/gk1q//9x1PuYbG/kQRCSY Q4sZAIvIgpdr3JbYjYGXeYVVzEBOKfXsLV0AZQ/55cQJKNjnVLmavb/Qh2SLabn3Hj5L d8lS14GOJ/XIbTrh+jgd/QfMcQDAK38ciGn2VdWYIsDQhrAcRuz5hRGqkd+6e11AkrzG gs2ZIRM8JbOgj8cnc2c8If88Hf6sTnqFnK7kHOqGSnkL+zzm42fRh71DsBrNSw6FA1GT GePA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkFeLpiMVaGjg7bafgmTQXe4qGBSTzFSCOkYmFKKF3cc5c35ZqTcQ0Ev1TlyEwxLvib+rfM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.54.229 with SMTP id m5mr11680467lbp.93.1418741070585; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:44:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:44:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:44:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:44:30 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Peter Williams To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3fd1c8a8e4b050a566520 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/37MkvhB3mx3_AvPgwBkP6zdESHo Cc: link-relations@ietf.org X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:45:20 -0000 --001a11c3fd1c8a8e4b050a566520 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In what situations would I use one vs the other? Peter Barelyenough.org On Dec 15, 2014 6:26 PM, "Paul Hoffman" wrote: > Relation Name: convertedfrom > > Description: Refers to a source from which this material was > converted. > > Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc > > Notes: n/a > > Application Data: n/a > > > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > --001a11c3fd1c8a8e4b050a566520 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` = rels. In what situations would I use one vs the other?

Peter
Barelyenough.org

On Dec 15, 2014 6:26 PM, "Paul Hoffman"= ; <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>= ; wrote:
Relation Na= me: convertedfrom

Description: Refers to a source from which this material was
converted.

Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc

Notes: n/a

Application Data: n/a


_______________________________________________
link-relations mailing list
link-relations@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations
--001a11c3fd1c8a8e4b050a566520-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 06:47:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10CA41A1B53 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fPjVLUjRLhV8 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-f175.google.com (mail-lb0-f175.google.com [209.85.217.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28EA51A1B4F for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f175.google.com with SMTP id u10so10782109lbd.20 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:37 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=4ZSddvjR56JaNb9tgMqpcKAiXHq7oIBDcWO2BPwx1ok=; b=GrljNdnnlxlZ0TQ9Ds/+9jCnnsZ7llHnZaUkn4kxsJWcUizrBSnOgW3+N3Xoy7Ot7N h4u+we+TQ5BJII0nhdmvDUTz4Poe445Z3+/kG3Jb6lvRp3yelE70fidIL2N5uIyjDyCh t7GF1JbD1/A9BBdpo4ss2hu19SctsIF2GDN3ghjV4dDjfYgSdBJR+oW3Ww1A10vIfnlj aSkkckrXGdYh1Ol/eemQ3ycISCgnq+V0voSUq+Li6z4OET/bzDOIR7XPHeBResXm6USw MaNBaN48eo8pELNcQkDKWm4JVtDcDHbxKbyYxkoMdFEhrFMqov2zVepaX0snjnUuhCe/ 71Sw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmTuEMRDix7wYv42rn8Ree01STUKTC/+508X1C8feYW0unWoZXEg89Gj7UXXmMwIZh6lGWb MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.162.226 with SMTP id yd2mr3017926lbb.1.1418741257623; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:47:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:47:37 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - ispartof From: Peter Williams To: Herbert Van de Sompel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0112c86cb07335050a5670a6 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/4mklENKnoJePXWbruHXaWJ4TQ6s Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations@ietf.org X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:47:41 -0000 --089e0112c86cb07335050a5670a6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I was wondering a similar thing but to me it seemed more like `collection`. Peter Barelyenough.org On Dec 15, 2014 10:56 PM, "Herbert Van de Sompel" wrote: > Hi Paul, > > I was trying to figure out how the ispartof rel is semantically different > from the item rel, see > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573 > > Cheers > > Herbert > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Dec 15, 2014, at 17:21, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > > > Relation Name: ispartof > > > > Description: Indicates that the link's content is a part of an > > external series. > > > > Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc > > > > Notes: n/a > > > > Application Data: n/a > > > > _______________________________________________ > > link-relations mailing list > > link-relations@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > --089e0112c86cb07335050a5670a6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I was wondering a similar thing but to me it seemed more lik= e `collection`.

Peter
Barelyenough.org

On Dec 15, 2014 10:56 PM, "Herbert Van de S= ompel" <hvdsomp@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
Hi Paul,=

I was trying to figure out how the ispartof rel is semantically different f= rom the item rel, see

http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-= relations.xhtml

http://too= ls.ietf.org/html/rfc6573

Cheers

Herbert



Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 15, 2014, at 17:21, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>
> Relation Name: ispartof
>
> Description: Indicates that the link's content is a part of an
> external series.
>
> Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc
>
> Notes: n/a
>
> Application Data: n/a
>
> _______________________________________________
> link-relations mailing list
> link-relations@ietf.org=
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations

_______________________________________________
link-relations mailing list
link-relations@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations
--089e0112c86cb07335050a5670a6-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 07:13:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DBF11A1B2C for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:13:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UhiguOEtplBW for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:12:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ig0-x22e.google.com (mail-ig0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A5AD1A1B30 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:12:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ig0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hn15so7013455igb.7 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:12:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=mTqCx/dVHUFo8dvk4swTpBXlwNO04kJSRYr5thipdMI=; b=FzbX2XsKVCpZGAlpxr1RErKhG4txY0qKpMBLjE2RdACZDToZrD3oDITh5/eb9Z7rWt 95gWckPvM38PrbQZAijt3GkirM96+7at2vGIIrGW1szppeim9k9uRBTAsca99HMXkwAc kuqmsnkCMAHAIbwNPWueskZ4B4fT3VUwD9MPai/HXU3d7PKYnIMe3WotQJ/dRb6RhKvU SWCAtPDjPuVegOeYCJj6zBZm1BXyu9no0Nhco0cWNNO/Hrzj8MdjiUslb53iqvBI61WH 5O6JJRYxPVEMb/p5lxj0l+/FTAzV6/cS+prH2Fmk4QZvUTrKaxNPDN1Xjd1YiCOx0FVD qcug== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.122.73 with SMTP id lq9mr2007553igb.10.1418742768102; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:12:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.0.168 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:12:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:12:48 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Herbert Van de Sompel To: Peter Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/AztIKRWOcrWZJ4Rb1i9a522a754 Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:13:09 -0000 On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams wrote: > How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In what > situations would I use one vs the other? > "original" is a relation type that was specified for the Memento "web time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/ So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I agree that "alternate" could be. Herbert > Peter > Barelyenough.org > > On Dec 15, 2014 6:26 PM, "Paul Hoffman" wrote: >> >> Relation Name: convertedfrom >> >> Description: Refers to a source from which this material was >> converted. >> >> Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc >> >> Notes: n/a >> >> Application Data: n/a >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> link-relations mailing list >> link-relations@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > > > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > -- Herbert Van de Sompel Digital Library Research & Prototyping Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ == From nobody Tue Dec 16 07:14:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176101A1B30 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:14:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0ae_SRshCxcK for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:14:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ie0-x233.google.com (mail-ie0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 371481A1B06 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:14:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id rp18so13074040iec.10 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:14:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=kq4cXTNAfktyMg7mUi7uoV2HLiSf3UqJJPb3nwgqj58=; b=v0ombxetl1c+5x5wivXO3GkYBuqCOX5hXRGux1YTPj+xci0KgDlS+NOS0qvMXpWwst tizKjaJi3jZ3kKmrc44NMNTd9hHlYhQX0V3KoAUiJMQ5oqxSwthZ6EuXVLwDqDR7wvdI GpjkegsU8zNBIwYoQCaWaQ/6wZH32A3kBNNuHwQZyWRzJJpkHRtmnjEUm/siGT7lAI+m WC/0Y2OCyz6AbdtWVuAD7lwW4xFRBUFlUqD2vLo84A5aY6VqZarMzFYjMpcFZlUyOqnr nUR9L/u0hN0wB/Cyga1nqx310mDucNbdfdCLI32dH1d+oJxwPZghNJ4wvzpP7A0zqVL0 AqzA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.122.73 with SMTP id lq9mr2016666igb.10.1418742869330; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:14:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.0.168 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:14:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:14:29 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - ispartof From: Herbert Van de Sompel To: Peter Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/1lezSpb3KwfQs2Fat6FWEJOJqEk Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:14:34 -0000 On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Peter Williams wrote: > I was wondering a similar thing but to me it seemed more like `collection`. > Yes, of course. "item" points from the collection to an item in the collection. and "collection" points the other direction. Which seems what ispartof does too. Herbert > Peter > Barelyenough.org > > On Dec 15, 2014 10:56 PM, "Herbert Van de Sompel" wrote: >> >> Hi Paul, >> >> I was trying to figure out how the ispartof rel is semantically different >> from the item rel, see >> >> http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573 >> >> Cheers >> >> Herbert >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> > On Dec 15, 2014, at 17:21, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> > >> > Relation Name: ispartof >> > >> > Description: Indicates that the link's content is a part of an >> > external series. >> > >> > Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc >> > >> > Notes: n/a >> > >> > Application Data: n/a >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > link-relations mailing list >> > link-relations@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations >> >> _______________________________________________ >> link-relations mailing list >> link-relations@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations -- Herbert Van de Sompel Digital Library Research & Prototyping Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ == From nobody Tue Dec 16 08:23:47 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03F811A1B30 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:23:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yBbNl2n_UeQg for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:23:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 237771A1BD6 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:23:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBGGNXW4042982 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:23:34 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:23:32 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> To: link-relations X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/kTXtTsaqNVhHq0gODiLwRys0_1M X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:23:38 -0000 On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams = wrote: >> How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In = what >> situations would I use one vs the other? >>=20 >=20 > "original" is a relation type that was specified for the Memento "web > time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a > resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version > management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for > example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/ >=20 > So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I agree that > "alternate" could be. "alternate" is defined as "Refers to a substitute for this context". = Saying that this thing was converted from that thing is quite different = than saying that they are equivalent. We all know that some conversions = are lossy, sometimes badly so. --Paul Hoffman= From nobody Tue Dec 16 08:29:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33D361A1BE3 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:29:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zdu9inVFdl1y for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:29:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22FDC1A1BE1 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:29:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBGGTUAK043233 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:29:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - ispartof From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:29:29 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> To: link-relations X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/GGwTDFjN5Or4VlzbOfI522AVdyQ X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:29:34 -0000 Actually, "item" is probably quite close to what I wanted to use = "isPartOf" for. In the use case I am working with, we are using a = element that can be repeated for many values. The current text is: o The current ISSN for the RFC Series. The value for the "rel" attribute is "isPartOf". The link should use the form "urn:issn:". The intention is to say "this link is part of that series", which "item" = might already mean. Thoughts? --Paul Hoffman > On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Peter Williams = wrote: >> I was wondering a similar thing but to me it seemed more like = `collection`. >>=20 >=20 > Yes, of course. "item" points from the collection to an item in the > collection. and "collection" points the other direction. Which seems > what ispartof does too. >=20 > Herbert >=20 >> Peter >> Barelyenough.org >>=20 >> On Dec 15, 2014 10:56 PM, "Herbert Van de Sompel" = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi Paul, >>>=20 >>> I was trying to figure out how the ispartof rel is semantically = different >>> from the item rel, see >>>=20 >>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml >>>=20 >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6573 >>>=20 >>> Cheers >>>=20 >>> Herbert >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Sent from my iPad >>>=20 >>>> On Dec 15, 2014, at 17:21, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Relation Name: ispartof >>>>=20 >>>> Description: Indicates that the link's content is a part of an >>>> external series. >>>>=20 >>>> Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc >>>>=20 >>>> Notes: n/a >>>>=20 >>>> Application Data: n/a >>>>=20 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> link-relations mailing list >>>> link-relations@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> link-relations mailing list >>> link-relations@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Herbert Van de Sompel > Digital Library Research & Prototyping > Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library > http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ >=20 > =3D=3D From nobody Tue Dec 16 09:34:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7DFA1A7001 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:34:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ge3DWd4nG3f5 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:33:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-f179.google.com (mail-lb0-f179.google.com [209.85.217.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 598E01A1B49 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:33:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id z11so11256244lbi.10 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:33:57 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Qo6nuH54VJ5ECWhxuwpYBYMucP7aVZ6dhSpzr9e6/YQ=; b=aVzip9nJ7VCj/h7vjZh3ptkW1I/WI0SIqjgo0Qzkl8QSXIElqI2Yvvd2hq95U/opl0 fPRT002Reqn1l7DJY9if7rbir6fUKJytGs/QFCOwjOtliSXU/VhCNaw4E9iMJ6Yvxb5x xLmo8GnbNqAionH6j5bROfrWNeDNi9yUapFeCs3RE52xswoHfrrYdZF60CurN78TeZc4 bm2AOScAd5AhUEHXpyn1/g7PXiwkr/E2YF3Q3wVGVyg055JHpf9CLuXg21F3gdOVUlmQ Mjl4B1dRLA4VS4+c9uLOQiipp9Ypv6d6z/jv17k0ajbPAG+AbB+G9PKfH8B3q1FzIQ0f Ie+w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl3dcHJLQkIb5V2wpABYvx5ud6PttnpycLNWEIy/uQOuS5a2uBrLN033kvihEBf7wGoNyku MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.3.100 with SMTP id b4mr35478595lab.68.1418751237509; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:33:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:33:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:57 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Peter Williams To: Herbert Van de Sompel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01494064896754050a58c3eb Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/HsvbpQR3QJ968AwWzSvSlhZM-kw Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:34:08 -0000 --089e01494064896754050a58c3eb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Herbert, Are you suggesting that it would be inappropriate to use the `original` rel in any non-memento representation? If that is the intent the registry should be updated to call out that narrowness of the acceptable use. Personally, i would prefer a more expansive interpretation based on the text in the registry. Ie, that the `original` link indicates that the context was derived from the target. This would, obviously, include mementos pointing to the resource of which they are snapshots, and would also allow for converted documents to reference their originals and several other potentially useful use cases. Peter On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams > wrote: > > How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In what > > situations would I use one vs the other? > > > > "original" is a relation type that was specified for the Memento "web > time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a > resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version > management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for > example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/ > > So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I agree that > "alternate" could be. > > Herbert > > > Peter > > Barelyenough.org > > > > On Dec 15, 2014 6:26 PM, "Paul Hoffman" wrote: > >> > >> Relation Name: convertedfrom > >> > >> Description: Refers to a source from which this material was > >> converted. > >> > >> Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc > >> > >> Notes: n/a > >> > >> Application Data: n/a > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> link-relations mailing list > >> link-relations@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > link-relations mailing list > > link-relations@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > > > > > > -- > Herbert Van de Sompel > Digital Library Research & Prototyping > Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library > http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ > > == > --089e01494064896754050a58c3eb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Herbert,

Are you suggesting th= at it would be inappropriate to use the `original` rel in any non-memento r= epresentation? If that is the intent the registry should be updated to call= out that narrowness of the acceptable use.

Personally, i woul= d prefer a more expansive interpretation based on the text in the registry.= Ie, that the `original` link indicates that the context was derived from t= he target. This would, obviously, include mementos pointing to the resource= of which they are snapshots, and would also allow for converted documents = to reference their originals and several other potentially useful use cases= .

Peter

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Herbert Van de= Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams <= ;pezra@barelyenough.org> w= rote:
> How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In w= hat
> situations would I use one vs the other?
>

"original" is a relation type that was specified for the M= emento "web
time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a
resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version
management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for
example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/

So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I agree= that
"alternate" could be.

Herbert

> Peter
> Barelyenough.org
>
> On Dec 15, 2014 6:26 PM, "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>>
>> Relation Name: convertedfrom
>>
>> Description: Refers to a source from which this material was
>> converted.
>>
>> Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc
>>
>> Notes: n/a
>>
>> Application Data: n/a
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> link-relations mailing list
>> link-relations@ietf.org=
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations >
>
> _______________________________________________
> link-relations mailing list
> link-relations@ietf.org=
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations
>



--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://publi= c.lanl.gov/herbertv/

=3D=3D
--089e01494064896754050a58c3eb-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 10:08:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B69351A7022 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:08:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.078 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2aeyOoui6bnU for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:08:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com (mail-ie0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 162261A86EC for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:08:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id tp5so13438171ieb.9 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:08:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=zvovma78XWyGP+B27v/1CkZv1FMla8JXz7Q4dV0Hydc=; b=di70B0rJVosjHfJMGTRiEQKDzQc5r1z/4O+8ckWN4XzF4IDa3d0FWB3ctuvncyc05w ayZIxuqzCaGa/8qk3n7w9nlloJkaXvg0DjNHoIAjKQDFl0z+E9kXLTZ0/BQOymgU1/Hy nrmCOH/B5iHjQjfH+UYhukT1iqz7ci9dU1MS3SBkUs6zsIexNAAfFwT8cz/H5353bW/+ /O/cpWvy6o8xyaocU+uPR5dB4CMR6ruegStpzK1hNKFYgntcsFCVUZPsA5ASmdTptk3O 12DsKJXkiyRHTo1T3PtAuz5M6iwd6by+eUsNfuVZPs9nlXyyUDMksxhptzY6r3J+Z1Xw Asyg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkGV0hDyEqkBJ0G5KF//CT08cx+m3PTSUiHzemkqqXf38Zork8hmMUUEdkCfi/2niPY33Wv MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.3.99 with SMTP id b3mr4029153igb.9.1418753287418; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:08:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.18.65 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:08:07 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [91.64.210.128] In-Reply-To: References: <4EEB0FEB.20901@gmx.de> <4EEB982C.8040308@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:08:07 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION - remoteStorage From: Michiel de Jong To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0129449cb88df1050a593d94 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/DlhfMpRXVMjL9CRUsY7wQQZHJ6k Cc: Sebastian Kippe , link-relations@ietf.org X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:08:11 -0000 --089e0129449cb88df1050a593d94 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi! > thanks for the pointers! we will work on fixing these issues and report back at a later time. So three years went by, sorrry. :) We just uploaded version 04 of our internet draft: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-dejong-remotestorage-04 and the link definition should now be hopefully be compatible with both link-relations and WebFinger. > the registration procedure asks for a "permanent and readily available" specification Would https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-dejong-remotestorage count? It redirects to the latest existing version. We're about to apply for RFC track, so then we could update it to that rfc. Thanks! Michiel. On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Michiel de Jong wrote: > > thanks for the pointers! we will work on fixing these issues and report > back at a later time. > > and thanks also for already reserving the name by the way. > > > On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Julian Reschke > wrote: > >> On 2011-12-16 14:48, Michiel de Jong wrote: >> >>> ... >>> >>> fair enough - we use the camel-case because localStorage and >>> sessionStorage also use them, so remoteStorage is an extension of that. >>> but here the relation name can be defined as remotestorage if that's >>> what the spec requires - i think it will still be human-readable without >>> problems. >>> ... >>> >> >> Yes. >> >> - the registration procedure asks for a "permanent and readily >>> available" specification; I'm not convinced that a Wiki page is >>> suited, unless there are procedures in place that ensure that... >>> >>> >>> ok, then please use >>> http://www.w3.org/community/unhosted/wiki/index.php?title= >>> RemoteStorage&oldid=47 >>> >> RemoteStorage&oldid=47> >>> which is the currently "frozen" version. in the future (maybe next year) >>> we might get a nicer address from w3c, but since we're a "w3c cg" >>> community group only, at the moment it's the best we can do. sorry! i >>> hope it's ok with you this way. >>> ... >>> >> >> Not sure I like this as a stable reference. >> >> If the whole point of this is to reserve the name for now, don't worry, >> it is: . >> >> Now to the registration itself: >> >> >> "Points to remote data storage, owned by the user, and accessible from >> the web." >> >> Who's "the user" here? >> >> Also, on the Wiki: >> >> >> > >>> >> >> I note that this is non-conforming. It has all kinds of undefined >> attributes, and doesn't have @href. >> >> Finally, how would the link above appear in an HTTP Link header fields? >> >> Best regards, Julian >> > > --089e0129449cb88df1050a593d94 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi!

> thanks for the p= ointers! we will work on fixing these issues and report back at a later tim= e.

So three years went by, sorrry. :) We just uploaded version= 04 of our internet draft:=C2=A0 https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-dejong-remotestor= age-04 and the link definition should now be hopefully be compatible wi= th both link-relations and WebFinger.


> the registration proc= edure asks for a "permanent and readily available" specification<= br>
Would https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-dejong-remotestorage coun= t? It redirects to the latest existing version. We're about to apply fo= r RFC track, so then we could update it to that rfc.

Tha= nks!
Michiel.


On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Michiel de Jo= ng <michiel@unhosted.org> wrote:
thanks for the pointers! we will work on fixing these issues and repo= rt back at a later time.

and thanks also for already reserving the n= ame by the way.


On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Julian Reschke <jul= ian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
On 2011-12-16 14:48, Michiel de Jong wrote:<= br>
...

fair enough - we use the camel-case because localStorage and
sessionStorage also use them, so remoteStorage is an extension of that.
but here the relation name can be defined as remotestorage if that's what the spec requires - i think it will still be human-readable without problems.
...

Yes.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0- the registration procedure asks for a "permanent and r= eadily
=C2=A0 =C2=A0available" specification; I'm not convinced that a W= iki page is
=C2=A0 =C2=A0suited, unless there are procedures in place that ensure that= ...


ok, then please use
http://www.w3.org/community/= unhosted/wiki/index.php?title=3DRemoteStorage&oldid=3D47=
<http://www.w3.org/community= /unhosted/wiki/index.php?title=3DRemoteStorage&oldid=3D47= >
which is the currently "frozen" version. in the future (maybe nex= t year)
we might get a nicer address from w3c, but since we're a "w3c cg&q= uot;
community group only, at the moment it's the best we can do. sorry! i hope it's ok with you this way.
...

Not sure I like this as a stable reference.

If the whole point of this is to reserve the name for now, don't worry,= it is: <http://paramsr.us/tracker/issue29>.

Now to the registration itself:


"Points to remote data storage, owned by the user, and accessible from= the web."

Who's "the user" here?

Also, on the Wiki:

<Link rel=3D"remoteStorage" template=3D"$TEMPLATE" a= pi=3D"$API" auth=3D"$AUTH" ></Link>

I note that this is non-conforming. It has all kinds of undefined attribute= s, and doesn't have @href.

Finally, how would the link above appear in an HTTP Link header fields?

Best regards, Julian

--089e0129449cb88df1050a593d94-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 10:33:58 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A404C1A1EFC for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o1wE64iX48oC for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f43.google.com (mail-la0-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FB651ACDAD for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id s18so11867906lam.30 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:39 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=os4jKw+6A5MaQGsWhdLJbdrBftQlz72Ntc1yk+z7n3s=; b=i+G4tXppBhr44NPaNwvSqijjfel6qgkxx+VhfVwChorYkUjPNRyBoXuAgDLnEUhbi6 AjRzYE+YMbbd7QXFdIglAc1ft2QRarDo51a8JIJeIeQYMUMYsQ8KuaB4XmPdePyPTqb5 HkBPwo34noxIR/oQbm4mD5tLMiaU9HjU5wSCncKqN2RuhbnzONj2a90AO+q6OtU7+i+0 rpfs+P6IHZv2aqG+Z8pvVCJ6P6PQIq0oFfrg32SnNrvMmAsw/onihr4HgFXDAxd40UYT uq+nfxjkXHkf6LHc5CfONBgfT/e7nM5ezyQTlZEcZD79zv5LBZxaUq9DlZw9lI5qebyi RObg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnPNTrG1/4ecqI8MpLlwJeWOD3aFU8fuS3IykMqUea1BN7r6jM0bxZEgP+2Ht1CAVxEVpZB MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.204.9 with SMTP id ku9mr37137239lac.55.1418754819197; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:33:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:33:39 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Peter Williams To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134386e05a1ab050a5999c2 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/JtZ9HVRCQ1wBufpcLihin8YEWX8 Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:33:55 -0000 --001a1134386e05a1ab050a5999c2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Paul, If the conversion is so lossy that it makes it conceptually different thing (eg, creating thumbnail) then `alternate` might not be the best choice. Otoh, if the conversions process goal is to produce an approximately equivalent document (eg, raw to jpeg) then i think `alternate` is exactly right. `alternate` does not imply that the target is a replacement for the context in all situations or use cases but that it is a different representation of the information. Peter barelyenough.org On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams > wrote: > >> How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In > what > >> situations would I use one vs the other? > >> > > > > "original" is a relation type that was specified for the Memento "web > > time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a > > resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version > > management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for > > example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/ > > > > So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I agree that > > "alternate" could be. > > "alternate" is defined as "Refers to a substitute for this context". > Saying that this thing was converted from that thing is quite different > than saying that they are equivalent. We all know that some conversions are > lossy, sometimes badly so. > > --Paul Hoffman > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations > --001a1134386e05a1ab050a5999c2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Paul,

If the conversion is so = lossy that it makes it conceptually different thing (eg, creating thumbnail= ) then `alternate` might not be the best choice. Otoh, if the conversions p= rocess goal is to produce an approximately equivalent document (eg, raw to = jpeg) then i think `alternate` is exactly right. `alternate` does not imply= that the target is a replacement for the context in all situations or use = cases but that it is a different representation of the information.

=
Peter
barelyenough.org

On Tu= e, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>= ; wrote:
On Dec 16, 2= 014, at 7:12 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams <pezra@barelyenough.org> wrote:
>> How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. = In what
>> situations would I use one vs the other?
>>
>
> "original" is a relation type that was specified for the Mem= ento "web
> time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a > resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version
> management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for<= br> > example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/
>
> So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I = agree that
> "alternate" could be.

"alternate" is defined as "Refers to a substitute for= this context". Saying that this thing was converted from that thing i= s quite different than saying that they are equivalent. We all know that so= me conversions are lossy, sometimes badly so.

--Paul Hoffman
_____________________= __________________________
link-relations mailing list
link-relations@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations
--001a1134386e05a1ab050a5999c2-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 10:43:04 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3BC1A700F for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:43:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KwsYVcoHQt2Y for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:43:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C9881ACDA8 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:43:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBGIh0sY050199 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:43:01 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:42:59 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> To: Peter Williams X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/IEOP4zQ4LVJBUXgXgIV0TnoFQRE Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:43:04 -0000 On Dec 16, 2014, at 10:33 AM, Peter Williams = wrote: > If the conversion is so lossy that it makes it conceptually different = thing (eg, creating thumbnail) then `alternate` might not be the best = choice. Otoh, if the conversions process goal is to produce an = approximately equivalent document (eg, raw to jpeg) then i think = `alternate` is exactly right. `alternate` does not imply that the target = is a replacement for the context in all situations or use cases but that = it is a different representation of the information. We disagree about what "alternate" means. I don't believe that "Refers = to a substitute for this context" from the link relation registry is the = same as your "approximately equivalent" above. --Paul Hoffman= From nobody Tue Dec 16 11:00:28 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732E81ACDE6 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:00:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eNSwtkFnSaXO for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:00:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ig0-x234.google.com (mail-ig0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F2911ACDCA for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:00:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ig0-f180.google.com with SMTP id h15so7593497igd.7 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:00:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=GskDEl7qwuApTy2gXYjtM216sHyoARkI+uOVpgU0Vos=; b=nkkyvuqulZ0tb/Wkm+oohbPLKmam9bG2JLJqjdY+vjKiZM9lhuD1WQSyZV2bcjP57f oTPy49XySKwaUoChiJbR+RBPBfzGcs6OTo595aTrnbTEJFbCNOIxOjHntHCQf3x2SEnV 2flhoziVZ+aHJzOqLUPFbU+plIzRcYacQPTN8UZQ4wJLPt0pUbsDHhPgnF4sKx1tBxLT ZX5lhp0Fp8di/GL5A1AxikS5s/b5uFWVXlQGspOXPWUV6ZjXFGqaPVhqcDOFp+sJWYTS yh40DZCpBDa9/0apKwDZf93tkrg2Kreb6Glha5IUhDuNLjeuXhPf+s6pLaaMhTZ9N3PO YoxQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.79.229 with SMTP id m5mr4224087igx.10.1418756420746; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:00:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.0.168 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:00:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:00:20 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Herbert Van de Sompel To: Peter Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/eUVEVCIWHlLlRr8JJVbGvRqj704 Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:00:27 -0000 On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Peter Williams wrote: > Herbert, > > Are you suggesting that it would be inappropriate to use the `original` rel > in any non-memento representation? If that is the intent the registry should > be updated to call out that narrowness of the acceptable use. > Yes, that is what I am suggesting: "original" is specific to the Memento protocol, RFC 7089. I think the IANA registry already limits the rel type to that context by stating: "An Original Resource is a resource that exists or used to exist, and for which access to one of its prior states may be required." Herbert > Personally, i would prefer a more expansive interpretation based on the text > in the registry. Ie, that the `original` link indicates that the context was > derived from the target. This would, obviously, include mementos pointing to > the resource of which they are snapshots, and would also allow for converted > documents to reference their originals and several other potentially useful > use cases. > > Peter > > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Peter Williams >> wrote: >> > How would this rel relate to the `alternate` and `original` rels. In >> > what >> > situations would I use one vs the other? >> > >> >> "original" is a relation type that was specified for the Memento "web >> time travel" framework. It points from a temporal snapshot of a >> resource (capture in web archive, version resource in version >> management system) to the resource that it is a snapshot of. See, for >> example, http://www.mementoweb.org/guide/howto/ >> >> So, I don't think "original" is appropriate here. But I agree that >> "alternate" could be. >> >> Herbert >> >> > Peter >> > Barelyenough.org >> > >> > On Dec 15, 2014 6:26 PM, "Paul Hoffman" wrote: >> >> >> >> Relation Name: convertedfrom >> >> >> >> Description: Refers to a source from which this material was >> >> converted. >> >> >> >> Reference: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc >> >> >> >> Notes: n/a >> >> >> >> Application Data: n/a >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> link-relations mailing list >> >> link-relations@ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > link-relations mailing list >> > link-relations@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Herbert Van de Sompel >> Digital Library Research & Prototyping >> Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library >> http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ >> >> == -- Herbert Van de Sompel Digital Library Research & Prototyping Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ == From nobody Tue Dec 16 12:02:02 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B69B1A1B99 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:02:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xw3DDlXjw903 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:01:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-f175.google.com (mail-lb0-f175.google.com [209.85.217.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D26A1A875C for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:01:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f175.google.com with SMTP id u10so11764220lbd.34 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:01:54 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=y/0pG8bJ4wVBhGBT2NBGNK5CjYn97QJQ/4D9ky7artE=; b=ZILWpS9kLv7cAfhTUUQZwAaaVMWiKTb66tWKJsqDOZfYF3TeGQIHMGs7YJg/uihT6L GhDFj7j2QBUSHp7NS0PtmKNhp9Pp2r1UJU1Iu+PqHKfCAG1C9jC6yH5zw+hcssOCf+bf Mu0GKKSa12IaW0K9mQJyF1KmAG7zu6HVWhTKsjD/YRoQuBsU4wQoW/bzpR0CZI/cLKQZ wHMWdfA1UDPWTpwSmwh8bnYxsJsJ6937brLqB4rehNykw5QvugYU2kI8PCFtH1TawUJA vtsQ5wVOTEwOI67ou+MoKd2weLDa9r7fXwzEj+p4WtL7a6fHk8rRqalpDpNKad4k9mKV Hdug== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnxL00TsEs+zjUnFwqIOcm2paTEnSNCTEXafxPplOPpB7EzDDxww0H6tro3kiGNVFp3dFbX MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.162.226 with SMTP id yd2mr4392494lbb.1.1418760114090; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:01:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:01:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:01:54 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Peter Williams To: Herbert Van de Sompel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0112c86c9f4f2c050a5ad481 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/3AGzXr5-aIgnaa5BIBoC5Y74L14 Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:02:01 -0000 --089e0112c86c9f4f2c050a5ad481 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel wrote: > > Yes, that is what I am suggesting: "original" is specific to the > Memento protocol, RFC 7089. I think the IANA registry already limits > the rel type to that context by stating: > > "An Original Resource is a resource that exists or used to exist, and > for which access to one of its prior states may be required." > > That verbage seems rather too subtle to result in the behavior you desire. Consider the situation where i have a resource that was created by converting an "Original Resource" that "exists or used to exist" to a different format. The last part of the sentence makes no sense in the context the relation registry (so is easily ignored) and nowhere is it clearly stated that one should avoid using this very generic sounding rel outside a memento. If we really don't have a rel for linking to an original (using the common informal meaning of that word) I think we should have one. `convertedfrom` seems somewhat too narrow and `alternate` misses the provenance aspect of "original". Peter barelyenough.org --089e0112c86c9f4f2c050a5ad481 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel <= hvdsomp@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, that is what I am suggesting: "original" is specific = to the
Memento protocol, RFC 7089. I think the IANA registry already limits
the rel type to that context by stating:

"An Original Resource is a resource that exists or used to exist, and<= br> for which access to one of its prior states may be required."

=C2=A0
That verbage seems rather too subtle= to result in the behavior you desire. Consider the situation where i have = a resource that was created by converting an "Original Resource" = that "exists or used to exist" to a different format. The last pa= rt of the sentence makes no sense in the context the relation registry (so = is easily ignored) and nowhere is it clearly stated that one should avoid u= sing this very generic sounding rel outside a memento.

If= we really don't have a rel for linking to an original (using the commo= n informal meaning of that word) I think we should have one. `convertedfrom= ` seems somewhat too narrow and `alternate` misses the provenance aspect of= "original".


--089e0112c86c9f4f2c050a5ad481-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 12:07:10 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3101A1ACD8A for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:07:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hV7CTAQ0nGG9 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:07:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ig0-x22f.google.com (mail-ig0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EB841ACE08 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:06:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ig0-f175.google.com with SMTP id h15so7533395igd.8 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:06:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=DtVY00rF4BzY0/9etAzurj9/iUOd7+9gRiDD1NraLVw=; b=X+6t38lhepnqDpNFJAIgXjR+EmYVJRlcigQHwoBtI2O4IL7VwRVj8oWnIS5ZMsdvBB 6DQxwSOWhth/9PMBa/a1hkvrBH08PHspBcSVch99I3huMqlSHyYYfnXG4LZqgoiQWClx /5BeyIWMs5+pT+XZbcoTHu2N3mSHqIp2ZWbCNay2Bi8I0jZ8UI+RBjvAw9t4T16jChYN R3yHfSQJV0lLAzIsW2G08J0B9vx2NGiOFKYcuoPGy53USVDjBrjxS1Z949zP69JdfuTB RRAmGdM+0QNgATiThZjDoppssrhfwad6RFB0OtvtWadP58H5UvPt8bZRYiEzolMEjxyt qwQg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.129.80 with SMTP id c77mr2708057iod.92.1418760403290; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:06:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.0.168 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:06:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:06:43 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Herbert Van de Sompel To: Peter Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/xObwaQtT2z0WtYDBqqz8qi3LsbA Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:07:08 -0000 On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Peter Williams wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel > wrote: >> >> >> Yes, that is what I am suggesting: "original" is specific to the >> Memento protocol, RFC 7089. I think the IANA registry already limits >> the rel type to that context by stating: >> >> "An Original Resource is a resource that exists or used to exist, and >> for which access to one of its prior states may be required." >> > > That verbage seems rather too subtle to result in the behavior you desire. > Consider the situation where i have a resource that was created by > converting an "Original Resource" that "exists or used to exist" to a > different format. The last part of the sentence makes no sense in the > context the relation registry (so is easily ignored) and nowhere is it > clearly stated that one should avoid using this very generic sounding rel > outside a memento. > Thanks for that feedback. I am not sure what the procedure is to change a registry entry but I will try to find out. > If we really don't have a rel for linking to an original (using the common > informal meaning of that word) I think we should have one. `convertedfrom` > seems somewhat too narrow and `alternate` misses the provenance aspect of > "original". > Does 'canonical' comes closer to what you want? Herbert > Peter > barelyenough.org > -- Herbert Van de Sompel Digital Library Research & Prototyping Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/ == From nobody Tue Dec 16 12:59:13 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA0B1A8791 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:59:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D4USNogIPIN0 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:59:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f41.google.com (mail-la0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18F9E1A877C for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:59:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id hv19so11857852lab.14 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:59:08 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6Keo/PovKVJ2KQMWayCpf2eYPz0I8RAGpkEfXx2HjbU=; b=mEwhSv+oCuzuCS4EY08eCYht2bywTine1A5DhGYTT/bvKqiTciFza+DaBbS28N21xC qCz7MgKiU1u33gXwQ5KUJsv81OoFnDmof9DNEdhBMkWFRCx+DSFJF7TI4xQ7WDeN/gjT MSV4DUCHsXG/ep4vuk9aiuhAF0y5akplZoTW5obR+gxUoL1kvMp1ELZf3o4Bu2K934fU 8hO8M3FqNCIPJwnYIODpMVjKQ0365KN7leaQRGp1mt2B1gY6idnvk/Fq+kk1GhsUDWaV lIlTBis4jeYwu1BG1Dp4UxXl1Jci1+UPJwIXSLINiqGlGUovfeNi5sduk/1e0Tc92za1 1F6w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmXrAP53kVw2N9CTFwCvFUVXVR8eTSGfffCQ6ToPQVYatRu1lwZoGt7Zz/05ti/rr1K9uls MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.204.9 with SMTP id ku9mr37712853lac.55.1418763548289; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:59:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.63.170 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:59:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:59:08 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Peter Williams To: Herbert Van de Sompel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134386e51040f050a5ba1f5 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/_ICf6eBB_frVoV2k6Mr6bu2-hmU Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:59:11 -0000 --001a1134386e51040f050a5ba1f5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel wrote: > > Does 'canonical' comes closer to what you want? > I don't think so. Consider a document that has been translated to a different language, the translation would likely link to the original but the original it not "preferred". Peter barelyenough.org --001a1134386e51040f050a5ba1f5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:06 P= M, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com> wrote:

Does 'canonical' comes closer to what you want?

I don't think so. Consider a document that has = been translated to a different language, the translation would likely link = to the original but the original it not "preferred".

Peter
=C2=A0
--001a1134386e51040f050a5ba1f5-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 15:56:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D7C1A036B for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:56:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9I2WXIVf7V7v for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:56:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pa0-x22b.google.com (mail-pa0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7370F1A035F for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:56:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id kx10so15149063pab.2 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:56:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=+m/sSu7/p9pAIHz0+30F0aIVB1xj1+S20Hz1o5UkozY=; b=v9i4vu6SjTPnPxYUdchfucOEjGa8qA9ET5MmgEy0v7gUP1ghLLxaC687TQq3BZoAYY SgDYer1ILVDh7sndATrxFFMnQ6JYX6+Mn/NvD9ZLFwWe1vOsn22AO8+UheWQXOBkMCfw jqQW8pTTKzBJd8AITgxEtJRuF6o87sDGBBEcCvpF6nyiPodBPU7E31fLu9s7WIyuVZIc /dPZzwtlFLGoJxIM2CmLm9Is4JPzlOgvhmG1zF3Yc8zyqITPSzAKTShbIX/MOz0bnjgJ bNbAo1Gnp06e9adbuRAAIY+K6X1lbXPnFZOdQLCOcJdZJ329xX17JcC65KH7ojk53KUJ reBw== X-Received: by 10.68.183.193 with SMTP id eo1mr63940185pbc.168.1418774192752; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:56:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.6] (c-67-164-146-42.hsd1.nm.comcast.net. [67.164.146.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fv4sm2024666pbd.47.2014.12.16.15.56.31 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:56:31 -0800 (PST) References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-156508CB-7760-47B5-BE07-7A1EF2D1FB42 Message-Id: <155AA1B5-A66E-4392-84EA-CA01F74BFD6B@gmail.com> X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D257) From: Herbert Van de Sompel Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:56:32 -0700 To: Peter Williams Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/tLfaOnUtrzs-sOewcsJGHJT7JR8 Cc: Paul Hoffman , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 23:56:35 -0000 --Apple-Mail-156508CB-7760-47B5-BE07-7A1EF2D1FB42 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Dec 16, 2014, at 13:59, Peter Williams wrote: >=20 >> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel wrote: >>=20 >> Does 'canonical' comes closer to what you want? >=20 > I don't think so. Consider a document that has been translated to a differ= ent language, the translation would likely link to the original but the orig= inal it not "preferred". >=20 Understood. I was wondering whether "derivedfrom" would not be a term than c= onvertedfrom? That would align with the term "derivation" that is used in W3= C PROV (see http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-primer/#derivation-and-revision). Herbert=20= --Apple-Mail-156508CB-7760-47B5-BE07-7A1EF2D1FB42 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Dec 16, 2014, at 13:59, Peter Williams <pezra@barelyenough.org> wrote:

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvdsomp@gmail.com> wrote:

Does 'canonical' comes closer to what you want?

I don't think so. Consider a document that has been translated to a different language, the translation would likely link to the original but the original it not "preferred".



Understood. I was wondering whether "derivedfrom" would not be a term than convertedfrom? That would align with the term "derivation" that is used in W3C PROV (see http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-primer/#derivation-and-revision).

Herbert 
--Apple-Mail-156508CB-7760-47B5-BE07-7A1EF2D1FB42-- From nobody Tue Dec 16 22:30:40 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744961A03C7 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:30:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z_LyHRgS2TW1 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:30:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B052F1A03E3 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:30:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.83] (unknown [118.209.77.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B9CF22E1F4; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 01:30:32 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 17:30:29 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/pHSAJ76niwX62whtN9FS16UykYM Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 06:30:38 -0000 FWIW - My rule of thumb is that if it's a human understanding (i.e., fuzzy = match) of semantics, we should be generous in determining what relations = to use, so as to avoid creating too many = slightly-different-but-mostly-the-same relation types. It's only when = there's a protocol (i.e., machine implications) of semantic differences = that it becomes important to split such hairs. In other words, it's long been apparent that there are (at least) two = kinds of link relations: a) those that are human-intuative and eminently reusable; e.g., "self" = "related" "describes" "describedby" "alternate" b) those that are specific to a protocol, and the target resource = usually has a well-defined interaction model; e.g., "memento" = "stylesheet" "profile" "archive" "edit-form" The former should be loosely defined and interpreted (with the aid of = the context of their use); the latter should be strictly defined and = interpreted. In other other words, don't get stuck on the specific meaning of a link = relation and create a new one unless you really, really need to. YMMV. > On 17 Dec 2014, at 5:42 am, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >=20 > On Dec 16, 2014, at 10:33 AM, Peter Williams = wrote: >> If the conversion is so lossy that it makes it conceptually different = thing (eg, creating thumbnail) then `alternate` might not be the best = choice. Otoh, if the conversions process goal is to produce an = approximately equivalent document (eg, raw to jpeg) then i think = `alternate` is exactly right. `alternate` does not imply that the target = is a replacement for the context in all situations or use cases but that = it is a different representation of the information. >=20 > We disagree about what "alternate" means. I don't believe that "Refers = to a substitute for this context" from the link relation registry is the = same as your "approximately equivalent" above. >=20 > --Paul Hoffman > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Tue Dec 16 23:35:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FF451A1E0C for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 23:35:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lAgeYn1XC6_X for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 23:35:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E44D1A6F2E for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 23:34:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.160] ([93.217.74.159]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MbOrg-1YJv0J1gyS-00IjVw; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:34:51 +0100 Message-ID: <54913215.1010905@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:34:45 +0100 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Hoffman , link-relations Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - ispartof References: <3F1B78FF-E18A-44E9-B2F8-9DACF1F89764@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:JLWU+ICXQ/tnfv3qJJKO2BUN+lNxZd6U6ncWXWL2KLwxoMfCouB kuxrCs1r8F5qxhyNOcAShJTPOHXPGTZMDT52428PCwywuTnt1ZYt9e4NskEHNP2HiFWqDaE nm7UOubv5WL4rFZojpfoLWFB5yRJRBxMhtaG9aEmmR3eWbuiwkmsqySJdWQxBZiVoyv6Xn0 PEF+D4Vw4z7qWx6Cvwj2Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/UhzKzocif-JarsEmdxzDHuWoed4 X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 07:35:01 -0000 On 2014-12-16 17:29, Paul Hoffman wrote: > Actually, "item" is probably quite close to what I wanted to use "isPartOf" for. In the use case I am working with, we are using a element that can be repeated for many values. The current text is: > > o The current ISSN for the RFC Series. The value for the "rel" > attribute is "isPartOf". The link should use the form > "urn:issn:". > > The intention is to say "this link is part of that series", which "item" might already mean. Thoughts? "item" would link from the series resource to the RFC. I think you want "collection". Best regards, Julian From nobody Thu Dec 18 14:10:29 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6965A1A8780 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:10:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iWldV7Jwk4sL for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:10:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4E8F1A8710 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:10:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBIMAOL2013291 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:10:25 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:10:23 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> To: Mark Nottingham X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/JMI14NNaO-i3QjeG2tOBVG0I6po Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:10:27 -0000 On Dec 16, 2014, at 10:30 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >=20 > FWIW - >=20 > My rule of thumb is that if it's a human understanding (i.e., fuzzy = match) of semantics, we should be generous in determining what relations = to use, so as to avoid creating too many = slightly-different-but-mostly-the-same relation types. It's only when = there's a protocol (i.e., machine implications) of semantic differences = that it becomes important to split such hairs. Your desire is understandable, but I think it falls down here. Someone = reading a document that has a link that is marked as "alternate" could = react differently than if they see a link marked "convertedFrom". You = the reviewer might find them to be = slightly-different-but-mostly-the-same, but someone looking at a = document with those two might find them quite different. "alternate" = could lead to "they're the same, and I have this other one cached, so I = can ignore this", while "convertedFrom" would not have that action at = all. > In other words, it's long been apparent that there are (at least) two = kinds of link relations: >=20 > a) those that are human-intuative and eminently reusable; e.g., "self" = "related" "describes" "describedby" "alternate" > b) those that are specific to a protocol, and the target resource = usually has a well-defined interaction model; e.g., "memento" = "stylesheet" "profile" "archive" "edit-form" >=20 > The former should be loosely defined and interpreted (with the aid of = the context of their use); the latter should be strictly defined and = interpreted. That seems fine, but "loosely" doesn't mean "with no context at all". > In other other words, don't get stuck on the specific meaning of a = link relation and create a new one unless you really, really need to. I feel we need to here, given that the best alternative has a different = meaning in the name and in the definition in the IANA registry. > YMMV. Does. --Paul Hoffman= From nobody Thu Dec 18 15:44:13 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010821A9142 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:44:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q7NRLBdZ2Ff6 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:44:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE4451A87AD for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:44:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.83] (unknown [118.209.36.212]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAA3050A85; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 18:44:07 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 10:44:05 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7866D053-9F9E-47F7-AF9D-E2E5898B9012@mnot.net> References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/ZLqr784YWdn28e_Lfft0Cjsp5UE Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 23:44:12 -0000 If you feel that you need to have a more precise relation defined, = please do -- but make it precise enough so that it doesn't make people = yet more unsure of which relation to use.=20 Cheers, > On 19 Dec 2014, at 9:10 am, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >=20 > On Dec 16, 2014, at 10:30 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>=20 >> FWIW - >>=20 >> My rule of thumb is that if it's a human understanding (i.e., fuzzy = match) of semantics, we should be generous in determining what relations = to use, so as to avoid creating too many = slightly-different-but-mostly-the-same relation types. It's only when = there's a protocol (i.e., machine implications) of semantic differences = that it becomes important to split such hairs. >=20 > Your desire is understandable, but I think it falls down here. Someone = reading a document that has a link that is marked as "alternate" could = react differently than if they see a link marked "convertedFrom". You = the reviewer might find them to be = slightly-different-but-mostly-the-same, but someone looking at a = document with those two might find them quite different. "alternate" = could lead to "they're the same, and I have this other one cached, so I = can ignore this", while "convertedFrom" would not have that action at = all. >=20 >> In other words, it's long been apparent that there are (at least) two = kinds of link relations: >>=20 >> a) those that are human-intuative and eminently reusable; e.g., = "self" "related" "describes" "describedby" "alternate" >> b) those that are specific to a protocol, and the target resource = usually has a well-defined interaction model; e.g., "memento" = "stylesheet" "profile" "archive" "edit-form" >>=20 >> The former should be loosely defined and interpreted (with the aid of = the context of their use); the latter should be strictly defined and = interpreted. >=20 > That seems fine, but "loosely" doesn't mean "with no context at all". >=20 >> In other other words, don't get stuck on the specific meaning of a = link relation and create a new one unless you really, really need to. >=20 > I feel we need to here, given that the best alternative has a = different meaning in the name and in the definition in the IANA = registry. >=20 >> YMMV. >=20 > Does. >=20 > --Paul Hoffman -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Thu Dec 18 19:05:44 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EFA21A9083 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:05:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DPK2YppyI_Ua for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:05:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3B4C1A8AFE for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:05:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBJ35aYi024172 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:05:38 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <7866D053-9F9E-47F7-AF9D-E2E5898B9012@mnot.net> Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:05:36 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> <7866D053-9F9E-47F7-AF9D-E2E5898B9012@mnot.net> To: Mark Nottingham X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/i5mhZTLr5Bi9v9Q72roYpnRrAA8 Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 03:05:42 -0000 On Dec 18, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >=20 > If you feel that you need to have a more precise relation defined, = please do -- but make it precise enough so that it doesn't make people = yet more unsure of which relation to use.=20 I believe my proposed value (convertedfrom) and the description ("refers = to a source from which this material was converted") is precise, and = differentiates well from "alternate". --Paul Hoffman= From nobody Thu Dec 18 19:14:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 537891A86FF for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:14:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vm7pWt7wdIHt for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:14:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D2541A9060 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:14:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.83] (unknown [118.209.36.212]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2706950A73; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:14:17 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 14:14:17 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> <7866D053-9F9E-47F7-AF9D-E2E5898B9012@mnot.net> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/LupHnQYjhRLeFzL8gfnM7PaqfLU Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 03:14:34 -0000 *nod* For bonus points, describe it using the terminology in RFC5988. Cheers, > On 19 Dec 2014, at 2:05 pm, Paul Hoffman = wrote: >=20 > On Dec 18, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>=20 >> If you feel that you need to have a more precise relation defined, = please do -- but make it precise enough so that it doesn't make people = yet more unsure of which relation to use.=20 >=20 > I believe my proposed value (convertedfrom) and the description = ("refers to a source from which this material was converted") is = precise, and differentiates well from "alternate". >=20 > --Paul Hoffman -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Thu Dec 18 19:55:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E4A11A00B9 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:55:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kh2bfMF4VqQN for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:55:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ie0-x230.google.com (mail-ie0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08D971A007C for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:55:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ie0-f176.google.com with SMTP id tr6so29347ieb.21 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=TwPc8tTtI3Vie4wQj5rxIt2ZBNPb6dxGu2mkyDJ+zNw=; b=Lql9SGjGHUfHU0OBvlFcZhEGFSzFM3DHfRipBozBHDdSt7D0xfOQzj8OHa+UEiuBSK q6uV7S21fOg523fowULF80smeP4xDJspj8JhEFGhvaS5vBWglbH9jR1zI3xQSqntwtF+ GnSqBMy5oJBVeRf9hBWI9NNho5sHcCCSR/OIJZrd9na8ln99M0v7fW+pCON2zDi9zEb3 tVY8aox6xUOWS68Vs3Fg8+oZY+gNAg9kCCZwhrGAt6YPkfX7aLTKL1nqgh426CHtbLhp ZxvpKLh2/yzOrKW/icTlqNd2vV0cQuL+j4L9Twps1+QysaBE5BvF0n3Uyh1oqn3yNuQ2 kQAg== X-Received: by 10.42.4.201 with SMTP id 9mr4984759ict.23.1418961302715; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.6] (c-67-164-146-42.hsd1.nm.comcast.net. [67.164.146.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id kt1sm409285igb.20.2014.12.18.19.55.01 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:55:01 -0800 (PST) References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> <7866D053-9F9E-47F7-AF9D-E2E5898B9012@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D257) From: Herbert Van de Sompel Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:55:02 -0700 To: Paul Hoffman Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/peKcmzpnnbuKPKhOC49c_6uHhkw Cc: Mark Nottingham , link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 03:55:06 -0000 On Dec 18, 2014, at 20:05, Paul Hoffman wrote: >=20 >> On Dec 18, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>=20 >> If you feel that you need to have a more precise relation defined, please= do -- but make it precise enough so that it doesn't make people yet more un= sure of which relation to use.=20 >=20 > I believe my proposed value (convertedfrom) and the description ("refers t= o a source from which this material was converted") is precise, and differen= tiates well from "alternate". And I would like to repeat my proposal to name the rel type derivedfrom to a= lign with the W3C PROV notion of derivation. Which is really appropriate in t= his case, I think. Herbert >=20 > --Paul Hoffman > _______________________________________________ > link-relations mailing list > link-relations@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations From nobody Fri Dec 19 08:32:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A29E91A8A1A for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:31:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qDuFrskfULxD for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:31:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87C391A8972 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:31:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sBJGVtYm057172 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 19 Dec 2014 09:31:56 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-99-181.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.181] claimed to be [10.20.30.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) Subject: Re: NEW RELATION - convertedfrom From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:31:54 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2CE69588-7371-44F8-91EB-05E2185A1B84@vpnc.org> References: <20468E0C-4F1C-42E2-98E7-368B7FDEED06@vpnc.org> <46EA0E94-835E-4F90-AA72-E44DE505D359@vpnc.org> <534C22F2-FAEF-4C7A-B0A8-D3A7821BFDA4@vpnc.org> <7866D053-9F9E-47F7-AF9D-E2E5898B9012@mnot.net> To: Mark Nottingham X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/sRILhtlFpMlm4mpHSNXWhv7E_9Y Cc: link-relations X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 16:31:58 -0000 On Dec 18, 2014, at 7:14 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > *nod* >=20 > For bonus points, describe it using the terminology in RFC5988. Whoops, yes. Please replace the text in my application with: The target IRI points to a resource from which this material was = converted. (Although I noted that Section 6.2.2 is full of fragments, and I modeled = on that, not on the better definitions currently in the registry.) --Paul Hoffman=