DCMI RDF AP Task Group
http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF_Application_Profiles
Meeting date: June 18, 2015
Meeting link: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=M1RMXAWHCVXID8E5NEAFH8K88R-JV0D&rnd=416945.34093
Attendees: Karen, Hugo, Antoine, Corey, Lars
Regrets: Stefanie, Tom, Valentine, Thomas
1. Publishing and accessing LD profiles
Thread started by Lars on profiles on the LOD list:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2015May/thread.html ("Profiles in Linked Data")
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;1208a4d2.1506
Case: in LD service moving to specific entity approach. using both RDF/XML and JSON-LD
We have (1) LD service and (2) EntityFact (beefed up data e.g. for a web page)
Want to serve both using same URI. Each needs an AP. AP needs to be part of content
negotiation. We use the media type to serve different APs. It would be better to have a separate dimension in the content negotiation
1. Format (turtle, RDF/XML)
2. data type/AP (BIBFRAME, RDA)
EntityFacts: http://hub.culturegraph.org/entityfacts/v1/100233791
RDF/XML from the authority service http://d-nb.info/gnd/100233791/about/rdf
The JSON from EntityFact has more data (labels for the sameAs links)
Need to refer to the AP
Need to have the AP machine-readable
Need to negotiate the AP
Where I'm stuck is how to negotiate
Several options
- use profiles with MIME type. But that's allowed only for JSON-LD or XHTML
- use the link header. But there's no 'q' for the preferences. Unless we extend rfc6906
- use a new HTTP header, 'profile' which could contain profile/shape names and would have q values
There was a huge discussion on philosophical discussion on what is a profile.
That's where the list got stuck.
There was a discussion on the data annotation group. But there's no group in W3C that's willing to take this.
The Linked Data Platform is close to the end of their mandate. It would be rather be for LDP2
I could try to place the requirement for discussion at TPAC
Karen: the discussion has not taken place in the Shapes group.
Lars: they have not answered.
Karen: it has come up, from IBM
https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/User_Stories#S45:_Linked_Data_Update_via_HTTP_GET_and_PUT
Lars, Karen: we could put it on the public list for the Shapes group
... Lars' case is wider
Lars: I think I know how to solve it.
... which could be a problem
... Would sening my UC be enough?
Karen: explain why you would want to do this
Antoine:
Karen: in the Shapes group many people are in a enterprise setting
... the case is much more open
Antoine: Arnaud Le Hors chairs both Linked Data Platform and the Shapes group.
... if it's just relevant for the LDP group then it may be out-of-scope for the Shapes group.
... in any case it's worth raising the problem to the Shapes group
... if just for them to make a formal resolution that it's out-of-scope.
... From a W3C perspective it would help to see where the work should happen
Karen: it might be out-of-scope for Shapes WG
... the group is limiting itself to validation of graphs
... Cf the position paper circulated to the list this week
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;97253c14.1506
Lars: what the W3C group has is less description than what we would need
Karen: and it's more fragmented
... it doesn't go into specifying a record structure
Antoine: it has record structure, no? What's missing is how to process
Corey: it misses the notion of structure, closed-world
... the fetching/filtering of data (not only de-referencing) to construct the thing you want to validate
... like Linked Data Patterns
Antoine, Corey: is Lars' case the same as Corey/Tom's?
Lars: there is data conversion
Corey: so there would be a parallel
Lars: dual interest: I want the data conversion AND the way the client gets the data
It's more obvious in the case of bibliographic data (in my email)
[1] http://d-nb.info/985906677
[2] http://d-nb.info/985906677/about/lds
[3] http://d-nb.info/985906677/about/bibframe
These are from the same bibliographic data. But different transformations
Antoine: will presenting both conversion and service help the w3c discussions?
Lars: I doubt.
Antoine:they could be in different triple stores
Lars: could be. But that's orthogonal
Corey: Tom and I's case was judged out of scope.
... they scope is 'once a set of triples exist, how to validate it'?
... when we came back to DSP and DCAM, a lot was was covered in SHACL
... DCAM says what is the source
Antoine: where is it?
Corey: it's not: DCAM defines a description set and constraints, but nothing on I build it.
... This is what I think this group should tackle
... Valentine has a similar hesitation
... https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1506&L=DC-ARCHITECTURE&F=&S=&P=29865
Karen: the W3C group is going to define the connection between the Shape and the data
... the selection routine
... some people think it will be a SPARQL query
... it's good that we present APs as being something wider. e.g. how to define a graph.
Antoine: could it be that we have two different levels?
Corey: we need the data generation, where the data comes from?
Lars: it might be different level. What I'm after is a sort of XML schema for RDF
Corey: OK, there's a difference.
... Lars case is not so much about validation, it's indeed rather for LDP. Which form of data to get, besides validation
ACTION: Antoine to sum up and email the discussion.
2. DC Architecture discussion, scope of the task group
Is graph management (de-referencing/caching prior to validation) in scope?
-> discussion at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2015Jun/0023.html
ACTION: Corey and Tom to write short position paper.
3. Core DCMI Requirements
Voting results:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bCpQVyxI-N2Ca83umvQD8OKTdsDyG6Sz-E8Qo3v8ynM/
ACTION: Karen to send an email re-organization reqs, to see if the notion of 'core' help us to make things clearer
--DONE: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;c8e0b38c.1506
4. Alignment between 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
W3C Use Cases and Requirements: http://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-ucr/
Comparison of W3C and DCMI requirements:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bCpQVyxI-N2Ca83umvQD8OKTdsDyG6Sz-E8Qo3v8ynM/
Current W3C requirements list, reorganized: http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/data-shapes-ucr/
Hugo's email with suggestions: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;41aa27ca.1505
ACTION: group to tackle by email:
- requirements taken from W3C which apparently don’t have a match in DC
- suggestions on the mapping from DC to W3C
5. Other requirement actions
Requirement changes:
ACTION: Antoine to look at unclear requirements in Hugo's email
--ONGOING: only one requirement remains unclear: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;8c92de00.1506
Abstract requirements
ACTION: Hugo to try to organize reqs in abstract requirements, trying to re-use Thomas' classification in the DB
--ONGOING: Thomas' classification was still ongoing work.
5. Update UCR document?
Evelyn and Thomas' version
http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF_Application_Profiles/UCR_Deliverable
6. AOB, next calls
============= Remaining items, for next calls
X. Development of test cases
- Europeana examples:
ACTION: Karen & Valentine: Develop one or more test cases based on Europeana data
--DONE: Two samples have been prepared: one valid EDM, one with errors
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=DC-ARCHITECTURE;e0ba3d12.1506
- Stefanie's examples:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1505&L=DC-ARCHITECTURE&F=&S=&P=11705
- Corey's examples (based on Hydra work)
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
Sprint on Linked Data Fragment and Fedora. June 8-June 19. Right now we're unsure whether there will be validation-related requirements
Fedora4's using linked data fragments - http://linkeddatafragments.org/ ?
X. Express requirements as RDF, mapping between DSP and our requirements [on hold for W3C first specs]
X. Coordination with BIBFRAME
Thomas' evaluation of BIBFRAME AP
http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF_Application_Profiles/BibframeAnalysis
X. Glossary - postponed until we have time!
X. Possible Next Steps: http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/requirements_next_steps
Agreed: defined what an RDF AP is, after agreeing on Core