OK, I think I understand better now. The URN would be more concise
and "tech-friendly", while non-technical emergency managers might
feel more at home with the "traditional list" alternative. Both
would amount to a unique value.
I wonder whether any of the groups that are developing taxonomies in
the emergency management field are planning to construct and manage
them in URN form. We might be fairly far ahead of the user community
with this option, although I can't say I see any harm in it.
Anyway, in that latter two-part form, it does strike me that the
"namespacing" element would need to refer to a specific list and not
just the responsible agency, since an agency might publish more than
one list. (And then, of course, we'd return to the question of
whether it should be suggested, or even required, that the list
actually be published for reference at its URI.)
- Art
On Jun 15, 2005, at 6/15/05 9:48 PM, Renato Iannella wrote:
> Art, proposal would then be to split into two components for
> expressing values from controlled vocabularies or "less-controlled"
> term lists.
>
> For example, either
>
> 1) "controlTerm" - must contain full URN for value (eg
> "urn:oasis:roles:emergency-contact")
> or
> 2) "listAuthority" - URI of the owner of the list of terms (eg
> "http://fire.gov.au") - optional
> "listTerm" - the value (eg "bush fire") - mandatory
>
