On 14.05.2010 21:06, James Snell wrote:
Ok, I've been giving this some more thought and I think a hybrid
approach works very well. As has been pointed out a number of times in
this thread, there are existing elements in other namespaces that
provide a algorithm/hash pairing. I think that the Link Extensions
Draft can provide a attributes for the most basic hash algorithms and
applications that require hash algorithms that are not covered can
fall back to the extension elements.
Which algorithms will be supported by the elements and which by the
attributes? Who decides which hash are basic?
My proposals:
1. attributes with URN
e.g.
<link href="foo" algo="urn:hash:md5:abc..xyz" />
2. attributes with CURIE [1]
e.g.
<feed xmlns=".." xmlns:hash="http://purl.org/hash/algo/";>
<link href="foo" algo="hash:abc..xyz" />
3. elements with hash and algorithm
e.g.
<link href="foo">
<h:hash algo="md5">abc..xyz</h:hash>
</link>
4. one attribute to one hash
<feed xmlns=".." xmlns:md5="http://purl.org/hash/md5/";
xmlns:sha1="http://purl.org/hash/sha1/";>
<link href="foo" md5:algo="abc...xyz" />
Proposal 1 is short. Proposal 2 is my choice, because it is expandable.
Proposal 3 and 4 are modification of a hybrid approach (I propose them
because I think that it should not be two method to represent hashes in
link).
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/curie/
Regards,
Dominik Tomaszuk
