W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > March 2012

Re: major revision of LDP draft charter

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 09:27:47 -0400
To: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: public-ldp@w3.org
Message-ID: <1332163667.6552.56.camel@waldron>
Thanks for these suggestions.   I've incorporated all but one (details
below), and a private comment into draft 13.    The diff...


... shows that you should just re-read the introduction.

On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 15:42 -0500, Paul Tyson wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 12:13 -0400, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > After various discussions, we've rewritten the Linked Data Platform
> > (LDP) draft charter.  New version is here:
> > 
> >         http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/charter
> >         
> > The diff is linked from there, but only the last few paragraphs
> > (standard charter stuff) are the similar enough for the diff to be
> > useful.
> > 
> > At this point, we're expecting to formally propose this to the W3C
> > membership within a week or two, so please review it soon.
> As one who has worked at applying W3C standards in the enterprise for
> some time, I am glad to see this moving along.
> Please consider these suggestions for some different words in the
> introduction. The first sentence of the 2nd paragraph says:
> "Simple put, the technique is to expose application data objects
> ("resources") on the Web, ...."
> How about instead something like: "Simply put, the technique is to
> represent things of interest (to the enterprise) as resources on the
> Web, ...."? "Resources" in that sentence means something like
> rdfs:Resource, and therefore can mean a "data object" or a person,
> document, part, building, idea, or any other thing of interest to the
> business.

I wrote it that way to try to keep some distance from httpRange-14.

(Strictly speaking, I don't think an HTTP GET on a URI identifying a
person can succeed; to succeed it would have to be a URI identifying a
data object which contains some information about the person.  A GET on
the first URI would hopefully give you a 303 redirect to the second

I am a little worried how the WG is going to deal with this topic, since
it can get so tricky.   For the charter, I was trying to be pedantically
correct without, I hoped, drawing to much attention to the subject.

   -- Sandro

> The same paragraph concludes: "...and the use of RDF brings automatic
> integration of data across systems and applications." I fear this
> statement would draw easy criticism from skeptics and build false hope
> for newcomers. RDF may be a royal road, but it is still hard work. I
> would strike this phrase. You could perhaps replace it with some
> specific, realistic claims about the benefits of RDF and linked data.
> The 3rd paragraph of the introduction is unclear, and again raises
> questions by describing the system as "relatively simple". Consider
> something like this as a replacement:
> "The Linked Data Platform is an enterprise-focused collection of
> techniques and services based on the W3C Semantic Web stack. Simple LDP
> applications can be developed and deployed using only RDF with minor
> extensions to an existing HTTP infrastructure. More extensive LDP
> applications can be built using any other specialized features such as
> RDFS, SPARQL, OWL, SKOS, RIF, Prov, etc."
> Regards,
> --Paul
Received on Monday, 19 March 2012 13:28:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:33 UTC