DCMI RDF AP Task Group
http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF_Application_Profiles
Meeting date: April 23, 2015
Meeting link: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=MDAL0I2WSSY4CQBPV7OKXPJGYL-JV0D&rnd=441893.59385
Attendees: Hugo, Valentine, Antoine, Corey, Karen, Thomas
Regrets:
1. DCMI and W3C Requirements
DCMI Req Database: http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/
Requirement discussion pad: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/requirements_analysis
New cleaned list: http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF_Application_Profiles/Requirements
ACTION: Stefanie & Antoine to interlink DCAP Reqs with W3C Reqs and send result to W3C WG, after Karen and Tom have compiled the list of requirements
--ON HOLD until the W3C reqs are a bit clearer. Also we'll have to compare with DSP.
all W3C drafts (5) https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Main_Page#Proposals
W3C Use Cases and Requirements: http://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-ucr/
ACTION: Karen to continue the comparison of W3C and DCMI requirements when W3C document is available.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bCpQVyxI-N2Ca83umvQD8OKTdsDyG6Sz-E8Qo3v8ynM/
[Discussion on de-referencing, caching]
Karen: most of the group participants don't have open linked data. It's rather enterprise scenarios
Corey: if found, add to graph, then validate
Antoine: validate data whether explicit or remote; first, look at triples and see if they are compliant with application profile; other level: considers how the triples are being obtained, e.g. dereferencing (access remotely); another level is inferring new triples.
Karen: W3C is deferring discussion of inferencing and de-referencing.
Antoine: This is how you close the world - do you want to close the world at your triples, or do you want to go further (de-reference)?
Corey: we have the case (R-171)
Karen: it seems people see this in terms of steps: de-referencing (bringing in prefLabels for subject) and then the validation.
... all the W3C validation would do is return error codes
Corey: we had already decided to not make it core
... I could leave with de-referencing everything before validating
Corey: AP says: My internal store this is the result of de-referencing. "This is de-referenced data." When someone else accesses your data the de-referenced triples are not there. AP says: this must be de-referenced before remaining tests will pass.
Corey: the notion of 'RDF Source' (in RDF1.1 and LDP) matches a bit the issue, but it's not fully fleshed
Karen: W3C is concerned about recursive shapes
Antoine: next step. going from W3C reqs to DC ones?
ACTION: Hugo to work on aligning requirements from W3C to DCMI
2. Core DCMI Requirements
ACTION: Stefanie to have a look at core
DONE: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;e400cc99.1504
Karen put them as https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bCpQVyxI-N2Ca83umvQD8OKTdsDyG6Sz-E8Qo3v8ynM/
everyone should vote by adding their initials!
Karen: Next step: match with DSP. I'll add a tab in the column
3. Other requirement actions
ACTION: Karen to complete new list of Reqs it as much as possible and call others to contribute
--DONE
ACTION: Tom to review new list of Reqs, see whether the definitions make sense. Start after Karen has finished a first section
--DROPPED
ACTION: Corey and Karen to write up cases of validation with de-referencing or local caches, to be sent to W3C
W3C call today may include de-referencing discussion
-- Corey's question: My question for the W3C group is whether their definition of "instance data" includes local caches of remote resources. Example of LCSH on id.loc.gov. Over 480,000 skos concepts represented, of which I may need 10,000 in a local system, so I will use a separate triplestore or something like Linked Data Fragments to cache. I have validation needs around dereferencing these and confirming their shape. I also potentially have a validation need on when my cache is invalid .
-- Partial answer: there is great discussion about how the Shapes standard will define the extent of the graph over which validation will take place. There is also discussion about extension mechanisms, e.g. the ability to call arbitrary routines.
Karen: I'll try to add the wiki page shown today and what we've discussed with Corey today
Corey: I'd like to put Tom Johnson in the loop
Karen: it's discussed today in the W3C
R-71 Conditional properties http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=node/78
ACTION: Stefanie and Valentine find or make up examples and them in the description of the requirement
--ONGOING
Express requirements as RDF, mapping between DSP and our requirements
ACTION: ask Thomas for a CSV from database - IDS + titles + links + descriptions [DONE]
ACTION: Thomas to send Corey the CSV [No longer needed?]
--DROPPED
Requirement changes:
R-67-CLASSIFY-PROPERTIES-ACCORDING-TO-OCCURRENCE
propA or propB or propC (exclusive or)
propD if type=X [remove from db]
Boolean property patterns
R-129-MACHINE-UNDERSTANDABLE-CONCRETE-SYNTAXES-FORMULATION-CONSTRAINTS
Change title to: Machine understandable syntax
ACTION: Karen will fix these two in the database; Antoine did them in the wiki
4. AOB, next calls
============= Remaining items, for next calls
X. Coordination with BIBFRAME
Thomas' evaluation of BIBFRAME AP
http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF_Application_Profiles/BibframeAnalysis
X. Coordination with Hydra
Hydra Metadata Working Group: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/hydra/Hydra+Metadata+Working+Group
Portland Common Data Model: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/FF/Portland+Common+Data+Model
ACTION: Karen: post this link to W3C group - on hold until W3C group gets to the right point
Fedora4's using linked data fragments - http://linkeddatafragments.org/ ?
X. Possible Next Steps: http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/requirements_next_steps
Agreed: defined what an RDF AP is, after agreeing on Core