Re: Profiles in Linked Data

Why not just POST some kind of RDF document (or JSON-LD) that describes
what is you want and in what format,  or if you really have to use GET,
 stuff it in a GET field and hope it's not too big?

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:07 PM, John Walker <john.walker@semaku.com>
wrote:

>  Hi Lars,
>
> > On May 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > I note in the JSON-LD spec it is stated "A profile does not change the
> semantics
> > > of the resource representation when processed without profile
> knowledge, so
> > > that clients both with and without knowledge of a profiled resource
> can safely
> > > use the same representation", which would no longer hold true if the
> profile
> > > parameter were used to negotiate which vocabulary/shape is used.
> >
> > Yes, I noted that text in RFC 6906, too, but assumed that "unchanged
> semantics of the resource" meant that both representations still describe
> the same thing (which they do in my case). Would a change in description
> vocabulary really mean that I change the semantics of the description?
>
> If it is exactly the same information in both representations (but using a
> different vocabulary), then you could argue the semantics are not changed.
> However I would expect that one representation would contain more/less
> information that another and that each vocabulary might have different
> inference rules, so indeed then semantics would differ.
>
> >
> > If so, I'd be happy to call it not a "profile", but a "shape" instead
> (thus adopting the vocabulary of RDF data shapes).
>
> I don't mind what term we use, so long as it is clear to all concerned
> what is meant by that term :)
>
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Lars
>
> John
>



-- 
Paul Houle

*Applying Schemas for Natural Language Processing, Distributed Systems,
Classification and Text Mining and Data Lakes*

(607) 539 6254    paul.houle on Skype   ontology2@gmail.com
https://legalentityidentifier.info/lei/lookup
<http://legalentityidentifier.info/lei/lookup>