W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > March 2019

Re: [dxwg] Does "profile of" require all or some elements? (#802)

From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 13:40:43 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-472426018-1552484439-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@rob-metalinkage What predicate? This is the first time it has been defined on the predicat, although that is logical. Is a profile a set of predicates? That would make this more clear. Can a profile be more than predicates? 

Here's where I think the confusion comes in. "Profile" itself is being defined  very broadly as a set of documents, some of which don't even have predicates. In fact, they may not be in RDF or in any other machine-actionable code. If profileOf is limited to machine-actionable schemas, then the definition of it needs to include that, and it needs to be clear that this is a different meaning of profile. If it is limited to schemas in RDF, then it needs to say that. Using the definition we have used for "profile", profileOf (adding "Of" to our defined "profile") can't mean anything related to processing of constraints. If it does mean conforming to constraints, then it has to be clear that it can only be used on resources that define constraints.

The problem that I see is that "profile" so broadly defined that basing any processing on "profile" is not meaningful. Other than discovery of resources, I don't think that "profile" is machine-actionable as it is defined. Actionability could be defined on certain resources but that would require having a defined set of resources that are actionable. I think that's at least a v. 1.1 use case, if not 2.0.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/802#issuecomment-472426018 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2019 13:40:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:08 UTC