- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:27:50 -0500
- To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, "public-grddl-wg@w3.org" <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>, "patrick.stickler@nokia.com" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "chris@bizer.de" <chris@bizer.de>, Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
I think it's up to the POWDER Group to decide whether or not to use RDF/XML+GRDDL->RDF plus reification or vanilla XML+GRDDL->RDF plus reification. As GRDDL Chair, I support any use of GRDDL :) It's seems reification needs to be use to define the formal semantics of POWDER, but I think it is the appropriate way to do it. Jeremy's RDF->GRDDL->RDF solution is very clever, but developers might want a vanilla XML version as well. I would prefer not to revisit the test-cases (as we closed this issue quite a while back, and I can see how the feature that Jeremy is suggesting using could be useful, as analogous problems re entailment crop up in OWL inference). I think the point to remember is that RDF/XML is, well, a valid XML format and so GRDDL can be applied to it, and the point in the spec about "If F and G are GRDDL results of IR, then the merge [RDF-MT] of F and G is also a GRDDL result of IR.". Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote: > Thanks, the examples are quite helpful. I was not aware that it was possible to do that with RDF/XML. > > While I definitely think a GRDDL-based approach is a good way to go, there are a couple of aspects of doing a GRDDL transformation of RDF/XML to produce more RDF that make me uncomfortable. > > 1. It relies on a corner feature of RDF/XML, though perhaps it is only a corner feature to me. Maybe to others it is a central feature. :) > > 2. It makes the semantics of an RDF/XML document less clear, because to a non-GRDDL aware receiver, the document conveys only the triples directly serialized in the RDF/XML, whereas to a GDDL-aware receiver, it conveys additional triples. If a document is served as application/rdf+xml, the recipient should be able to look at the RDF/XML spec to determine its semantics. But the RDF/XML spec does not reference the GRDDL spec. > > To an extent, we can finesse this ambiguity by recalling GRDDL's "faithful rendition" clause > http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#sec_rend > and taking the position that if the additional triples from the GRDDL transformation are all *entailments* from the base triples, then the resulting merged set of triples could legitimately be viewed as a "faithful rendition" of the original document. However, that is very error prone, because essentially the same information is being conveyed in two different ways: once through the directly serialized triples and their entailments, and again through the GRDDL results. > > So regarding POWDER, I would be quite uncomfortable with POWDER using this RDF/XML + GRDDL approach. I also don't see any benefit to it over an XML + GRDDL approach. To be clear, by an "XML + GRDDL" approach I mean: define POWDER in terms of abstract RDF, but also define a custom XML format whose semantics are *entirely* defined by the RDF resulting from its GRDDL transformation. This would give the combined benefits of: > > - a concise XML serialization for those who want it, so XML tools can be used if desired; > > - clear semantics (given by GRDDL-generated RDF); and > > - compatibility with the Semantic Web, so standard RDF tools can also be used. > > Regarding GRDDL, I think it was a mistake to include that feature in the GRDDL spec. I think it would have been better to say that the GRDDL results of an RDF/XML document -- or any other RDF serialization, for that matter -- are *only* the RDF graph represented by that document. > > In any event, GRDDL test case http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl-tests/#grddlonrdf is clearly flawed and should be corrected or deleted in an erratum, because the GRDDL spec at > http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_rdfxbase > talks about a "conforming RDF/XML document" > http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_rdfxbase > but, assuming the RDF Validator is correct, the input of that test case is not a conforming RDF/XML document. > > > David Booth, Ph.D. > HP Software > +1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com > http://www.hp.com/go/software > > Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not represent the official views of HP unless explicitly stated otherwise. > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hpl.hp.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:00 AM >> To: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) >> Cc: public-grddl-wg@w3.org; patrick.stickler@nokia.com; >> chris@bizer.de; Phil Archer >> Subject: Re: Multiple GRDDL results in a single transform??? >> GRDDL and Named Graphs >> >> Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote: >> >> >>> Can you please show an example? If the input for test case >>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/grddl-tests#grddlonrdf >>> were converted to this form, what would it look like? >>> >>> >> Sorry for delay in replying ... >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/grddlonrdf.rdf doesn't include a >> typed node ... >> >> This means that we can't use the namespace doc method but >> (referring to >> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#start >> ) >> We can serve the following doc with mimetype application/rdf+xml: >> >> <rdf:Description >> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" >> xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" >> xmlns:con="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#" >> xmlns:data-view="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#" >> data-view:transformation="foaf2con.xsl" >> rdf:about="http://musicbrainz.org/mm-2.1/album/6b050dcf-7ab1-4 >> 56d-9e1b-c3c41c18eed2"> >> <foaf:maker> >> <foaf:Agent >> rdf:about="http://musicbrainz.org/mm-2.1/artist/33b3c323-77c2- >> 417c-a5b4-af7e6a111cc9"> >> <foaf:name>The Jimi Hendrix Experience</foaf:name> >> </foaf:Agent> >> </foaf:maker> >> >> </rdf:Description> >> >> This has one extra triple over and above the original, since the >> data-view:transformation is treated as a property attribute. >> >> Adding a type triple instead, we could also serve the >> following as rdf/xml: >> >> >> <eg:DummyType >> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" >> xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" >> xmlns:con="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#" >> xmlns:eg="http://example.org/namespace#" >> rdf:about="http://musicbrainz.org/mm-2.1/album/6b050dcf-7ab1-4 >> 56d-9e1b-c3c41c18eed2"> >> <foaf:maker> >> <foaf:Agent >> rdf:about="http://musicbrainz.org/mm-2.1/artist/33b3c323-77c2- >> 417c-a5b4-af7e6a111cc9"> >> <foaf:name>The Jimi Hendrix Experience</foaf:name> >> </foaf:Agent> >> </foaf:maker> >> >> </eg:DummyType> >> >> And at http://example.org/namespace.rdf we have a namespace doc >> including the triple >> >> <http://example.org/namespace#> >> dataview:namespaceTransformation >> <????/foaf2con.xsl> . >> >> Jeremy >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- -harry Harry Halpin, University of Edinburgh http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 18:27:39 UTC