Re: RDF Shapes has published shacl (Shapes Constraint Language) draft

Hi,


Am 21.03.2015 um 13:59 schrieb Dietrich Schulten:

> To illustrate why I think this might be a problem: I want to be able to
> let my service accept a query like
> 
> http://example.org/orders?status=ORDER_PROCESSING
> 
> where ORDER_PROCESSING stands for an enumerated value with linked data
> name, while at the same time being able to query
> 

Why would I want to do that? Isn't the only correct way to pass the full
URL here:

http://example.org/orders?status=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org%2FOrderProcessing

Certainly so, if you see json-ld exclusively as a human-readable
serialization of RDF.
But that is not the correct way to look at it. If you read the abstract
of the json-ld spec, it is also a way to describe a deployed system that
uses JSON in such a way that its communication gets a defined meaning as
Linked Data. Because, smooth upgrade path :)

(json-ld even has a construct which isn't there in the RDF model, but
only in the json-ish, the expanded and the compacted form:
data-indexing. Just to prove that json-ld is not *only* a human-
readable serialization of RDF.)

Dealing with query parameters as we do here is certainly an edge case,
since the parameter value is not json-ld.

But my general expectation is that an existing service that understands
the URL http://example.org/orders?status=ORDER_PROCESSING should be able
to say that with hydra. Certainly nourished by the fact that json-ld
goes to great lengths to allow me to express that ORDER_PROCESSING
really means http://schema.org/OrderProcessing.

Best regards,
Dietrich

Received on Sunday, 22 March 2015 08:55:27 UTC