W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > December 2017

Re: Start of profiles analysis page - 2nd reply

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 14:05:51 -0800
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <769b17fd-96e4-c446-6d90-2e12740f6637@kcoyle.net>

On 12/6/17 10:45 AM, mail@makxdekkers.com wrote:
> Karen,
>> Not all access to APs will be through content negotiation, AFAIK, so we have to consider 
>> other access avenues, such as a document at is located on a web site, profiles in wikis, etc.
> The expressions of the profile might be at 
> http://example.org/profiles/xyz/profile.rdf
> http://example.org/profiles/xyz/profile.xml
> http://example.org/profiles/xyz/profile.json
> So it would be possible to access them without content negotiation. But I guess, we need to consider content negotiation because our deliverable is called "Content Negotiation by Application Profile"
>> If there is a "concept" AP it needs to be something that can be represented, 
>> thus is not entirely abstract. 
> In my mind, it *is* "abstract" in the same sense that FRBR Work is an abstract entity.

Makx, the FRBR work is proving to be very difficult to implement
precisely because it is so hard to be precise about an abstraction. If
the AP is "abstract" in that sense it has no actual existence in any
written or coded form, which means that it cannot be "converted" to rdf,
html, xml, or whatever. It is ethereal, an essentially non-existent as
any "thing". I don't know how we can work with such an entity.


> Makx.

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2017 22:06:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:44:56 UTC