W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: ACTION SteveH: Write up a service description of features supported for his service

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:38:58 +0000
To: DAWG public list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20050215163858.GF8916@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 10:24:58AM -0500, Kendall Clark wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 03:00:43PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
> > 
> > <http://triplestore.aktors.org/rdql/>
> >         rdf:type dawg:HTTPQueryService ;
> >         dawg:closedOver <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> ;
> >         dawg:supportsDataType xsd:integer, xsd:float ;
> >         dawg:querySyntax <http://www.w3.org/Submission/RDQL/> ;
> >         dawg:resultFormat <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-XMLres/> ;
> >         dawg:usesOntology akt:support, akt:portal, akt:rdfcompat, akt:inca,
> >                 <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/>,
> >                 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
> 
> So these will end up in the protocol document in some similar form;
> but I'll need to describe the meanings of these predicates, and as I
> just pointed out on the phone call, I don't really understand
> dawg:usesOntology... Do you mean that the query service "understands"
> (in some vague way) some or all of the terms from these vocabularies?
> Or something else?

No, just that it contains some data that uses terms from that ontology. I
didn't mean it to imply that the sevice could reliably DESCRIBE instances
in those ontologies, for example.

It if will help, here are the sort of names I rejected:

containsOntology (confusing, might not be true)
containsDataDefinedInOntology (unwieldy)
usesTermsFromOntology ("")
containsDataDefinedBy ("", but actually not too bad)
usesSchema (might anoy non-RDFS people)

In the end I settled for usesOntology, and decided not to care too much. I
dont like encouraging people to read too much into property names anyway.
 
> > I attended a workshop on linking semnatic websites on Monday, and briefly
> > described the DAWG work, including the possibility of a description such
> > as this, and the idea was warmly received.
> 
> I heard similiar good reports from this workshop, too. Basically,
> "we're going to use SPARQL query and protocol".

Yup. I was pleasantly supprised.

- Steve
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 16:39:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:22 GMT