RE: Profiles in Linked Data

Martynas,

> As you wrote, media type is orthogonal to profiles. To retrieve
> RDF/XML, you would use content negotiation (Accept header).
> 
> You would need to run the Graphity processor that would match URI
> templates and execute SPARQL queries from the sitemap ontology.
> 
> Sure, instead of query strings

OK. But that would require the client to re-write the resource URI to put in the correct query string.

> you could use Accept-Profile/Profile or
> similar headers to advertise profiles and their preference. It's just
> that the uptake for new custom HTTP headers will be slow, so there's
> not much practical advantage.
> 
> On the other hand, it seems like you want different descriptions of a
> resource -- so it seems to me that these should in fact be different
> resources? That could be split into
> http://example.org/some/resource/dcat and
> http://example.org/some/resource/premis, for example.

Well, at least to me it is two descriptions of the same resource (much as a mobile-optimised website is the same resource as the "real" website, but sort of minimalised). Particularly when I refer to concepts, e. g. "Semantic Web" [1], or persons, e. g. "Tim Berners-Lee" [2], the URI references the RWO in no particular format. When I client actually wants to _do_ something with that information, the client and the server need to negotiate a way to find the best description. That is where profiles (or shapes) enter the equation.

[1] http://d-nb.info/gnd/4688372-1

[2] http://d-nb.info/gnd/121649091


Best,

Lars

Received on Thursday, 7 May 2015 11:35:13 UTC