W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Example of Atom publication using LDP

From: Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:49:11 -0500
To: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
CC: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Message-ID: <CD3998E6.ED0B%erik.wilde@emc.com>
On 2013-02-07 17:41 , "Pierre-Antoine Champin"
<pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>I have to strongly disagree with you. I think the 'profile' thing is very
>nice, especially because it is (concrete) syntax agnostic, hence well fit
>to RDF. Indeed, the same profile URI could be used with different RDF
>  text/turtle;profile=http://w3.org/ldp
>  application/rdf+xml;profile=http://w3.org/ldp
>  text/n-triple;profile=http://w3.org/ldp
>and mean exactly the same thing, namely something in the line of
>  The conveyed graph must contain a triple of the form  <> rdf:type X,
>  where X is one of the classes defined in the LDP ontology;
>  if X is ldp:Container, <> MUST have the following properties: ...
>  if X is ldp:Resource, <> MUST have the following properties: ...
>Whether those constraint are syntactical (i.e. the required triples must
>actually *be* there) or semantic (i.e. the required triples may be merely
>inferred) is another question, although I think the profile should
>specified which inference regime should
> be used to interpret the content.
>  pa
>PS: I know that the media types above do not currently support the
>'profile' parameter. On the other hand, the RDF working group is still
>active (well, will be if its extension request is accepted :-/), so it's
>the perfect time to suggest this change. I noticed
> that, for a start, JSON-LD already just adopted it

thanks, all very well put! as soon as the RFC is out, my plan was to
evangelize a bit more. it should be out in the next few weeks, i guess.


Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 16:50:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:45 UTC