W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-19: Adressing more error cases, as is

From: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 03:17:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CACfEFw-GwC48Dis7+w3E43APFcCjUE2wYGxVw+EnmjB1CS0V0g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Cc: public-ldp@w3.org
> you can only have one of these two ;-)

:0)

I think that it seems more difficult to do in RDF/XML than in Turtle.

As an exercise, I created a (very rough) Turtle approximation of the
HTTP Problem JSON:

https://gist.github.com/westurner/5704379

It may or may not be useful here.

This also looked helpful:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3669407/convert-xsd-to-rdf-schema

--
Wes Turner


On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu> wrote:
> hello wes.
>
>
> On 2013-06-03 15:10 , Wes Turner wrote:
>>
>> application/api-problem+turtle may be a good solution.
>> text/turtle is the mimetype for Turtle RDF Syntax.
>
>
> you can only have one of these two ;-) my proposal was based on the
> convention of most web standards nowadays to mint media types. the second
> one is based on the point kingsley made that in RDF, this often is pushed
> into the generic RDF media types.
>
> if you want to go this route (regardless of the media type), then you'll
> have to come up with a mapping of the currently JSON-based model into
> RDF-land. currently, JSON is the canonical model, and the XML syntax is
> derived from it. notice that this took a bit of negotiating, because JSON is
> more permissive than XML in its name syntax, so we restricted the names in
> potential extensions so that they don't cause trouble in the XML syntax.
> it's currently just a "should" in
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-problem-04#section-4, but
> at least we have made an effort and documented the reason.
>
> my guess is that mapping the problem model into RDF also requires a little
> bit of tweaking to accommodate for its roots in JSON, and to make the
> extension model reasonable. i am not 100% sure how to best do this, but i am
> pretty sure to get to good results it takes some handwork instead of just
> mechanically mapping JSON structures.
>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 08:17:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:35 UTC