- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 09:21:47 -0400
- To: "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, <public-lld@w3.org>, "public-xg-lld" <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Antoine, As you suggested, I changed "URL" to "http URI" and also added a link to Wikipedia on the topic of "rewrite engine". I used "http URI" instead of "HTTP URI" because I think it helps draw a distinction between http as a URI scheme <http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html> vs. HTTP as an Internet protocol <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616>. I don't think W3C documents are consistent about this, but I can at least justify it with this reference: http://www.w3.org/TR/uri-clarification/#contemporary "An http URI is a URL." I also added "such as Drupal" with the link you suggested. Thanks! Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: public-xg-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-lld- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Antoine Isaac > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:30 AM > To: public-lld@w3.org; public-xg-lld > Subject: Re: Relevant technology -- DVRQ? > > Hi Ed, Jeff, > > Indeed great stuff, thanks a lot! > > My main comments is about the use of "URL" in the last section, as in > "Linked Data's focus on naming resources with URLs". It's likely to > convince readers that the (web) architecture remains the same, which is > good. But it may confuse the less technically savvy people who would > bump into the section by chance, and wonder why "URI" is not appearing > anymore--most of the Linked Data-related prose uses URI. > Could "HTTP URI" achieve a kind of balance between the two concerns > here? > > Much more minor, about the CMS system section: is > http://drupal.org/node/1089804 is a core reference here? > > Cheers, > > Antoine > > > > Those are great additions. Thanks Ed. > > > > I know I should get involved with Grail open-source development to > help > > upgrade their default scaffold to produce Linked Data, but I probably > > won't find the time. :-( > > > > Jeff > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: public-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request@w3.org] > On > >> Behalf Of Ed Summers > >> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 8:48 AM > >> To: public-xg-lld; public-lld > >> Subject: Re: Relevant technology -- DVRQ? > >> > >> Based on that conversation we had in the last telecon I added a > >> section for Web Application Frameworks and Content Management > Systems > >> to the Draft Relevant Technologies wiki page [1]. > >> > >> Comments, feedback and edits welcome :-) > >> > >> //Ed > >> > >> [1] > >> > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Relevant_Technologies > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Young,Jeff (OR)<jyoung@oclc.org> > >> wrote: > >>> During the call and again below, Ed mentioned an "ah-ha" moment > when > >> he > >>> realized Web scaffolding frameworks like Rails, Drupal, DJango, > etc. > >>> could be used to publish Linked Data. I had a similar "ah-ha" > moment > >>> (Grails in my case). At least in the case of Grails, the domain > > model > >> is > >>> implemented directly using object-oriented programming classes, and > >> the > >>> Web create, read, update, and delete (CRUD) functions are supplied > >>> automatically by a model-neutral controller "scaffold". Out-of-the- > >> box, > >>> Grails automatically maps these object-oriented classes to a > >> relational > >>> database, but there are abstractions in the framework for other > > types > >> of > >>> physical stores. Also, in the case of Grails at least, this > >>> domain-neutral scaffold can be tweaked to automatically support > >> Linked > >>> Data URIs and the production of RDF as well as an ontology. I would > >> be > >>> happy to turn over my experiments if someone wants a closer look. > >>> > >>> Ultimately, though, I got frustrated with this type of solution > >> because > >>> it requires a programmer to implement what should possible to > > achieve > >> in > >>> the hands of a domain-expert directly. D2RQ seems like a much more > >>> promising solution in this regard, although I will admit there are > >> still > >>> gaps to fill to catch up with the create, update, and delete > > features > >> of > >>> scaffolding frameworks. > >>> > >>> Jeff > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: public-xg-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-lld- > >>>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ed Summers > >>>> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 6:20 AM > >>>> To: Antoine Isaac > >>>> Cc: public-xg-lld > >>>> Subject: Re: Relevant technology -- DVRQ? > >>>> > >>>> Hi Antoine, > >>>> > >>>> I think Jeff was talking about the d2r server [1], which has a > >>>> framework component called d2rq? In the cold light of day I'm > still > >>>> wondering if it might be worthwhile for the Relevant Technologies > >>>> section [2] to mention how web frameworks (rails, drupal, django, > >> etc) > >>>> and also RDFa are low barrier options for publishing Linked Data. > >>>> > >>>> //Ed > >>>> > >>>> [1] http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/d2r-server/ > >>>> [2] > >>>> > >> > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Relevant_Technologies > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 13:22:52 UTC