W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > February 2009

Re: [updated] EARL 1.0 Schema

From: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:04:15 +0100
Message-ID: <49A5179F.1060002@fit.fraunhofer.de>
To: ERT WG <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
> Hi Johannes,
> 
> Johannes Koch wrote:
>> Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10/WD-EARL10-Schema-20090223>
>>>
>>> An updated editor's drafts of EARL 1.0 Schema is available for 
>>> review. Please have a close look at the new approach in the 
>>> conformance section [1], we will need to decide if this is the 
>>> approach to take.
>>
>> Looks ok to me. However it's not clear whether conforming processing 
>> tools have to be able to process all the features described. Or are 
>> there properties that are required for processing while others are 
>> not? Similar for producing tools.
> 
> OK, we can clarify the wording. The idea is that conforming processors 
> must process all the classes and properties, as they are described in 
> the "Validation" section:
>  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10/WD-EARL10-Schema-20090223#validation>
> 
> Do you agree with this approach?

Yep

>>> Note that we also seem to have an issue with the current concept for 
>>> mainAssertor [2], since foaf:member has the domain foaf:Group and the 
>>> range foaf:Agent.
>>
>> So every time you use earl:mainAssertor in a triple, the subject 
>> becomes of type foaf:Group and the object of type foaf:Agent. Is this 
>> a problem?
> 
> If we make earl:mainAssertor a sub-property of foaf:member, then indeed 
> this would be the consequence. In this case it would be better to rename 
> the property to something like mainMember or primaryMember or such.

I don't think this is necessary.

> Another approach could be to keep both the domain and the range of the 
> earl:mainAssertor property to be earl:Assertor (as currently defined). 
> This would mean that both the subject and the object in such a triple 
> would always be of type earl:Assertor.

Given the following triple

<#someAssertor> earl:mainAssertor <#someOtherAssertor>

With earl:mainAssertor being a sub-property of foaf:member and having 
the domain and range earl:Assertor, this would imply the following 
additional triples:

<#someAssertor> rdf:type <earl:Assertor>
<#someAssertor> rdf:type <foaf:Group>
<#someOtherAssertor> rdf:type <earl:Assertor>
<#someOtherAssertor> rdf:type <foaf:Agent>

I don't see any problem. Resources can have many types.

-- 
Johannes Koch
Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT
Web Compliance Center
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628    Fax: +49-2241-142065
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 10:04:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 February 2009 10:04:54 GMT