W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > June 2018

Re: [dxwg] Profile Composition and Languages

From: Vladimir Alexiev via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:14:11 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-399869456-1529914444-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Added `profile_negotiation`, removed `content_negotiation`
- Could you please provide a link to `profileDesc`?
- I think the most difficult aspects of "profile composition" will relate to non-monotonicity.
  @rob-metalinkage said "the definition of profile adoption does require constraints to be transitive - a profile cannot relax or change sense of an inherited constraint", but I'm not so sure. I think that a common requirement is to provide "full" and "simplified" views of resources, then what do we do with shape elements that refer to full-view data elements?
  - JSONLD Frames can do that
  - in GraphQL the client specifies in the request which fields he wants to be returned
  - @azaroth42 wants the [Getty Vocabularies](http://vocab.getty.edu) to return various views (full=SKOSXL+ISO25964, SKOS, with or without sources/contributors, etc)
- imho NIEM has developed the most advanced data model composition mechanisms and conventions (extension, refinement, augmentation...). I haven't looked at NIEM for 1.5y, but I notice that https://reference.niem.gov/niem/specification/naming-and-design-rules/4.0/niem-ndr-4.0.html has an RDF binding, and defines a JSONLD context. Is someone in the WG familiar with NIEM?



-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by VladimirAlexiev
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/162#issuecomment-399869456 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 25 June 2018 08:14:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 October 2019 00:15:44 UTC