- From: Ruben Verborgh <Ruben.Verborgh@UGent.be>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 17:36:46 +0000
- To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>
- CC: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Hi Rob, Antoine, > I think profile negotiation is deeper than the existing support for serialisation choice already handled by conneg - its about both the content model and the content choices. +1 Media types define syntax, structure, and/or semantics. Profiles (in the sense of negotiation) define additional structure and/or semantics, on top of one or multiple media types. >> Btw I'm surprised to see that the ProfileNegotiation profile would be more general than the DCAP one. There is no need to restrict profile negotiation to DCAP; the same mechanism can be used for many other things. >> DCAP profile is "a document (or set of documents) that specifies and describes the metadata used in a particular application." This is fairly general. But not as general as "(a IRI for) additional structural and semantical constraints". The latter is independent of data/metadata, documents, and applications. It doesn't even require a specific document. >> Especially, it includes the possibility to specify vocabularies (ontologies) and extensions, which to me is more general than 'constraints'. No, it is the other way around: using specific vocabularies is a constraint, but a constraint can be many other things. Hence, "constraint" is more general. >> But maybe that's because I understand 'constraints' in a more specific way, It seems so; for me, a "constraint" is a limitation or restriction. >> Would there be any strong objection to understanding (and renaming) 'constraints' as 'specifications' in the ProfileNegotiation definition? Yes; we really mean "constraint" there. A profile can literally be anything that is not syntax. Examples: – including a back link – having a "copyright" key (specified, for instance, on top of JSON) – using a specific vocabulary In any case, whatever definition we use in profile negotiation will be so generic that DCAT can define it however it pleases (as long as it is not syntax, which it will clearly not be). Best, Ruben
Received on Monday, 19 June 2017 17:37:35 UTC