W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > November 2016

Re: Europeana API as an evidence for the DWBP

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 23:33:28 +0100
Message-ID: <582B8D38.9080403@few.vu.nl>
To: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
CC: "public-dwbp-wg@w3.org" <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi Bernadette,

Thanks a lot!
I agree with using the new form.
You can use http://labs.europeana.eu as the link.

Cheers,

Antoine

On 09/11/16 13:36, Bernadette Farias Lóscio wrote:
> Hi Antoine,
>
> Thanks a lot for your message and your review on my report! I'm sorry for taking so long to answer your message, but I had to travel a lot in the last weeks.
>
> I agree with you that it is better to consider the Europeana Data Service rather than just the API.
> In this case, which link should I use to refer to the "Europeana Data service"?
>
> I read your comments and I agree with most of them. A reviewed version of the report is available [1].  I'm planning to include Europeana in the DWBP implementation report, so please let me know if you agree with this new version of the evaluation.
>
> kind regards,
> Bernadette
>
> [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mRVp8Vdudepk68AjQbhNoZnLU-0-vH_4fVug_J-hCxo/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> 2016-10-30 19:39 GMT-03:00 Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl <mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl>>:
>
>     Hi Bernadette,
>
>     Thanks. In fact your effort shows good and bad points:
>     - it's hard to collect all the details when one is not very close to the dataset
>     - it's good that you contact people and nag them ;-)
>
>     I've tried to add some comments to the form. And here's where the lack of time and generality of BPs hits. For many I was not sure that what I was thinking of would change a 'fail' into a 'pass'. So I've just put comments ina  new column, letting you judge - though for some BPs I'm quite affirmative that the API would pass.
>
>     Also, I've generalize my response to include the linked data service. It becomes difficult to separate the LOD from a more 'traditional' API when one is built around the other, and both are on the same namespace. And even if our LOD service is less mature, we still intend it to be a recognition that some of the LOD recommendations are indeed BPs that we want to follow, and thus can be counted as 'implementation' (in the wider sense) of the specified BPs.
>
>     So maybe it is better then to consider a wider 'Europeana Data service' item than just the 'traditional' API.
>     Actually the various services we have at Europeana can also be seen as a token that some of us at Europeana do agree with some (not all!) of the points raised in the blog posts Pieter just sent. Even if that's another story - the point right now is that it's much better to consider our complete data offer not just one API.
>
>     Best,
>
>     Antoine
>
>
>     On 27/10/16 20:19, Bernadette Farias Lóscio wrote:
>
>         Hi Antoine,
>
>         I hope everything is fine with you! We are still collecting evidences for the DWBP and I was considering to include the Europeana API as an evidence.
>
>         I was taking a look on the Europeana Labs site and I made a first report about the API [1]. It would be great if you could take a look! Please, let me know if you agree with the evaluation and feel free to complement or to make changes.
>
>         Feel free also to include other evidences.
>
>         Thanks a lot!
>         Bernadette
>
>         [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mRVp8Vdudepk68AjQbhNoZnLU-0-vH_4fVug_J-hCxo/edit?usp=sharing <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mRVp8Vdudepk68AjQbhNoZnLU-0-vH_4fVug_J-hCxo/edit?usp=sharing>
>         [2] http://labs.europeana.eu/
>
>         --
>         Bernadette Farias Lóscio
>         Centro de Informática
>         Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>         ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> Centro de Informática
> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2016 22:34:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 15 November 2016 22:34:05 UTC