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

Re: Conneg ttl files, PROF, and Normativity

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 13:41:29 -0700
To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>
Cc: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ccf00dd5-643e-61bd-b15a-1e2daca568e5@kcoyle.net>
If the cnpr .ttl is not normative, what does that mean for the status of
properties listed in the document, which are in a normative section
defining conformance? See:[1] (Note that DCAT lists normative and
non-normative namespaces, and the dcat: namespace is normative.) Is
there a way to say that the properties are normative but the .ttl file
is informative? That would provide a resolution.

Thanks,

kc
[1] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#vocabulary-specification

On 10/8/19 1:01 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
> nope - just a non-normative description - nothing is dependent...
> 
> 
> On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 06:26, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
> 
>     All -
> 
>     There are two Conneg .ttl files. One is for the Alternate Representation
>     Data Model (Section A.2). [1] This is an OWL ontology and states its
>     path as <http://www.w3.org/ns/dx/conneg/altp>.
> 
>     Another is the profiles.ttl [2] which gives its path as
> 
>     @prefix cnpr: <http://www.w3.org/ns/dx/conneg/profile/>
> 
>     This latter vocabulary has subclass dependencies on PROF, and uses PROF
>     for the description of functional profiles of Conneg, such as:
> 
>     cnpr:http a prof:Profile ;
>         prof:isProfileOf <https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof-conneg/> ;
> 
>     The "cnpr" properties are defined in Section 7.2 on functional profiles,
>     which is normative.[3] In it, if I understand correctly, PROF is being
>     used to define the functional profiles as profiles of conneg.
> 
>     I wonder if we don't have the same issue that we had with other uses of
>     PROF in normative areas - that as a note, PROF is somewhat shaky as a
>     dependency for a normative vocabulary. It does seem that the functional
>     profiles are even more deeply integrated with PROF than the elements I
>     noted in a previous email.[4] Could the normative areas of Conneg and
>     PROF be entirely separated and Conneg still have functional profiles?
>     (Note: I do NOT know how W3C views vocabularies that are used in
>     normative areas of a recommendation - that is, whether they must also be
>     normative.)
> 
>     Again, the issue is that passage of Conneg to CR may be at risk if
>     normative functions depend on a vocabulary that is not at a final stage
>     of development. I hope DaveR and Philippe can advise re the W3C
>     viewpoint. Thanks.
> 
>     kc
> 
>     [1] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/gh-pages/conneg-by-ap/altr.ttl
>     [2] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/gh-pages/conneg-by-ap/profiles.ttl
>     [3] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/conneg-by-ap/#conformance-profiles
>     [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Oct/0081.html
>     -- 
>     Karen Coyle
>     kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>     skype: kcoylenet
> 

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2019 20:41:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 October 2019 00:15:58 UTC