On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 23:34 +0200, Jiří Procházka wrote: > http://buzzword.org.uk/2009/rdf-profiles/spec > by Toby Inkster > > Certainly an interesting and useful thing, though quite troublesome to > model. The draft is quite original, but I think making it a bit similar > to existing ontologies could be more practical, saving time later when > mapping the ontologies. > Checking a profile is basically evaluating a boolean value based on some > conditions made on selection of triples which match certain pattern. I > think SPARQL (aggregates like COUNT) and SPIN (constrains) are very > close to this. Also I wonder if there is nothing to take from OWL > regarding constrains... This use case -- the need to validate sets of RDF triples in an application-specific way -- is described in this paper on RDF and SOA from the 2007 W3C Web of Services workshop: http://www.dbooth.org/2007/rdf-and-soa/rdf-and-soa-paper.htm#data-validation SPARQL certainly seems like a natural fit, since it is an established standard, though something that is more specifically tailored to application-specific validation may be more concise or convenient if it becomes established. -- David Booth, Ph.D. Cleveland Clinic (contractor) Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.Received on Monday, 5 October 2009 18:14:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:32 GMT