[uf-new] hAudio Issue D4: 2008-01-10 rel-enclosure does not allow for links to streaming files

[Manu Sporny]

Andy Mabbett wrote:
>>"By adding rel="enclosure" to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the
>>destination of that hyperlink is intended to be downloaded and cached."
>
> I don't take issue with that definition; I simply don't believe that a
> streaming audio feed, (say, one running 24/7, like BBC Radio 4's) can
> ever be an "enclosure".
>
> Consider the usage "I have downloaded it and enclose it with this
> e-mail".

Your issue has to do with the semantics of the word "enclosure", which
unfortunately means something a bit different in the English language as
it does in the computing realm.

It's a valid point - and I'm a bit torn as you could interpret it in
different ways. Like you said, one could use it in the following sense:

"I have downloaded it and enclose it with this e-mail", which would be a
valid use of enclosure.

It all depends on what you're "enclosing"... are you enclosing the
actual file or a reference to the file. My interpretation is that
rel-enclosure states that you're "enclosing a reference to a
representation of what you are discussing".

A better analogy would be:

"I have enclosed a device that will let you listen to this radio
station.", as well.

Or... "I have enclosed a portal to let you listen to this audio stream".

I do admit, however, that this concept will be lost on those that don't
know much about knowledge representation... so perhaps there is a better
word than rel-enclosure?

>>My preference is to resolve that rel-enclosure is applicable to both
>>static and streaming files and note the decision on the rel-enclosure
>>wiki page.
>
> In which case "enclosure" is a misnomer. "Embedded" might be better.

It's better, but you can't really embed or enclose something that has no
end or temporal boundary, can you? (unless we get into the realm of 5+
multi-dimensional physics).

rel="manifestation", rel="download" or rel="representation" are more
accurate.

rel="download" is basically what we decided to use for the Media RDFa
vocabulary (which the Audio RDFa vocabulary is layered upon):

http://purl.org/media

So, that's an option if we'd like to keep both vocabularies in sync, or
offer rel-download as an alternative to rel-enclosure.

The down-side is that rel-enclosure already exists and we should re-use
when possible.

Thoughts from the community?

-- manu