VOResource vocabulary URLs

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear Semantics,

During the review for VOResource 1.1, a very much semantics-related
question came up -- essentially: do we want flat or nested vocabulary
URLs?

Full disclosure: I'm for flat[1].

In more Detail: VOResource defines four vocabularies:

* content_level (as in "Research" or "Amateur")
* content_type (as in "Survey" or "Animation")
* date_rule (as in "Created" or "Updated")
* relationship_type (as in "IsDerivedFrom" or "Cites")

I maintain there are applications for all of these terms outside of
Registry proper.

If that is true, my first choice of vocabulary URL,

http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/voresource/content_level

(and so on) is unfortunate -- there's voresource in there, which
makes, if nothing else, a claim of ownership that this shouldn't
make.  In particular, the vocabularies (including additions or
additional relationships between terms) should be managed by the
Semantics WG, not by Registry.

So -- would anyone seriously object if the vocabulary URLs (and hence
the location on the IVOA server) were to become

http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/content_level ?

         -- Markus

[1] My gospel is clear here:

$  python -c "import this" | grep nested
Flat is better than nested.