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

Content negotiation for DQV

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:00:04 +0100
Message-ID: <58370074.4080508@few.vu.nl>
To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi everyone

Riccardo and I had a discussion that I'm going to continue here, as there's not much time to inform you and get your feedback!

Riccardo wrote:
> About the content negotiation, I think there are a couple of things which won't require much effort and we might consider to do in  a DWBP/ "eat your own dog food"  perspective:
> 1) Add some other RDF encoding for DQV.  I have  generated  the rdf/xml
>   and json-ld, if you want to take a look about how they look like,  see [1]  [2].
> Shall we ask phil to include them and to change the  content negotiation accordingly?
> In that way, the
>    curl -I -H "Accept: application/rdf+xml" https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv#QualityMeasurement <https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv#QualityMeasurement>
> would  return the rdf/xml encoding, instead  the current  ttl.
> 2) Add the HTTP content negotiation on html,
> A  dereferenciation to the right  HTML  snippet  can be obtained with a negotiation rule similar to the following
> #https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv
> RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} ^.*text/html.*
> RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/#dqv:$1 <https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/#dqv:$1> [R=303,NE,L]
> That would solve any call like this
>   curl -I -H "Accept: text/html" https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv# <https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv#QualityMeasurement>TERMYOULIKE
> Into
> https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/#dqv:TERMYOULIKE
> For example, https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv#QualityMeasurement <https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv#QualityMeasurement>  would be turn into https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/#dqv:QualityMeasurement

This is great!
This is receipe #3 at
isn't it? (sorry I have a meeting in 10 min and no time to check further right now)

> What would be the point of creating a brand new HTML page where collecting  DQV terms?
> In my opinion, the definitions  that are in  working note are a quite good  HTML representation for DQV terms, to use them instead of a brand new HTML page, that would just copy them,  is not  just a back up solution, that  we might want to deploy due to the lack of time and interest in providing a new HTML page, but it is an opportunity to land the user to the official DQV reference.
>   Moreover I have always found a little disturbing to  get landed  on an intermediate  and often not so informative document when I want to check the meaning of a vocabulary term. I can understand that is required  in case of complex vocabulary recommendation, where Vocabulary specification is kept separate from example in the primer, but  for DQV,  we have  provided  definitions and examples as a whole in our working note and to point straightly to  the working note does not seem to me as awkward as it might seem for other Vocabularies. What do you think?

Yes your suggestion is perfectly fine for me. Anyway any discussion/change for adding another HTML representation can be postponed to a next version. Not this W3C Note.
Note that I think it doesn't need to be addressed right on Friday (as it doesn't change the Note per se), but I prefer to raise it now in front of everyone.


> [1] https://github.com/riccardoAlbertoni/dwbp/blob/gh-pages/dqv.rdf
> [2] https://github.com/riccardoAlbertoni/dwbp/blob/gh-pages/dqv.jsonld <https://github.com/riccardoAlbertoni/dwbp/blob/gh-pages/dqv.jsonld>
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2016 15:00:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 24 November 2016 15:00:40 UTC