Feedback on PROF testing from ODRL CG

The ODRL Community Group has now implemented a test PROF-based template for defining community profiles: https://github.com/w3c/odrl/blob/master/core-profile/odrl-profile-template.ttl. Using it, they have created a draft profile for RightsML: https://www.iptc.org/std-dev/RightsML/2.0/odrl-profile-RightsML_2.0-draft01.ttl.


Discussion about this test implementation has centred around the following points:


  1.  ODRL CG being happy with the general direction of PROF
     *   it gives them a simple way to define profile parts and relations they say
  2.  Confusion about the object instance values for dct:conformsTo
     *   compared with the values for dct:format which are areay (IANA Media Types)
     *   I have created an issue for this: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/916

  3.  What constitute sensible URIs for profiles
     *   E.g. the core ODRL 2 .2 profile, is the best URI http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/core or something else?
     *   They intend to resolve this by listing URIs the decide on for central ODRL profiles at their profiling Best Practice page: https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/wiki/Profile_Best_Practice

  4.  What PROF’s Test Suite (https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof/#testsuite) will contain
     *   It will contain notes on how to validate instance data against PROF’s own SHACL constraints (early draft): https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/gh-pages/profilesont/full-constraints.ttl

     *   It will indicate tools that can be used in different environments to do this, such as pySHACL: https://github.com/RDFLib/pySHACL


Overall, very positive response to PROF from the ODRL group. It serves a couple of their needs and they can contribute back to PROF development with the profiling requirements they have already produced.

Nick