W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-csv-wg@w3.org > April 2014

Re: Suggestion on ISSUE-7 in "Model for Tabular Data and Metadata on the Web": Allow metadata in any RDF-enabled format

From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 11:31:06 +0100
Message-ID: <53427E6A.7030704@apache.org>
To: "public-csv-wg@w3.org >> \"public-csv-wg@w3.org\"" <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
On 07/04/14 01:09, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> Hi David,
> Thanks for raising this. I think that there’s a distinction between the metadata about the dataset (eg its author, when it was published) being mappable to RDF and the standardised format of the metadata document that provides annotations about CSV files being in an RDF format.
> Being able to map CSVs and metadata about CSVs into RDF is very much part of what the Working Group needs to do, and Andy and Gregg are taking that work forward at the moment. That is what the charter is referring to when it says "It should also be possible to encode this metadata in RDF”.
> Regarding the format of the metadata document: being able to use CSV for that document is exactly where my thinking is going as well. As you say, it means that it can be mapped to other formats if required. I think it also makes the creation of the metadata/schema accessible to non-developers, which is a good thing to achieve if we can manage it.
> A generic format would be something like:
> about,property,value,type or language
> ,name,Example,
> ,author,Jeni Tennison,
> ,created,2014-04-06,date
> col=1,name,Name,en
> col=1,name,Nom,fr
> col=1,required,true,boolean
> ...
> A more specific format would need to look something like:
> row,col,name@en,name@fr,description@en,description@fr,required,type,lang
> ,,Example,,,,
> ,1,Name,Nom,Someone’s name.,,true,string,en
> ,2,Email,,Someone’s email.,true,URL,
> which is messy for handling things like multiple languages, which are moderately likely within schemas.
> Curious what other people think of this approach.
> Jeni

JSON would seem to be a viable alternative.

CSV might be manageable with a spreadsheet but the a col per possibility 
gets into accidental errors, like being lang=fr and a URI datatype 
(because of denormalization!).

JSON is more natural for the consuming client software on the web.

I've started to enumerate the annotations from a conversion POV without 
considering syntax.


Only rough notes at the moment.

Received on Monday, 7 April 2014 10:31:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:39 UTC