RE: Profiles in Linked Data

John, Kingsley,

I wrote: 
>>> OK, I can understand that. Does that mean that if I have under the same URI
>>> serve different representations (e. g. rdf/xml, turtle and xhtml+RDFa) all those
>>> representations must return exactly the same triples, or would it be allowed to
>>> use schema.org in the RDFa, W3C Organisation Ontology for rdf/xml and foaf
>>> when returning turtle? After all it's different descriptions of the same resource.

John wrote:
 
>> My take on this is each representation (with negotiation only on format via
>> HTTP Accept header) *should* contain the same set of RDF statements
>> (triples).
>> Also one could define a different URL for each representation which can be
>> linked to with Content-Location in the HTTP headers.
>> 
>> We’re you to introduce an additional (orthogonal) way to negotiate a certain
>> profile, this would be orthogonal to the format. Following on from above, one
>> could then have a separate URL for each format-profile combination.

Kingsley wrote:

> Yes.
> 
> For the sake of additional clarity, how about speaking about documents and
> content-types rather than "representation" which does inevitably conflate key
> subtleties, in regards to RDF (Language, Notations, and Serialization Formats)?

The terminology is fine with me, as long as we don't forget the entities we describe.

So to repeat my question in another mail: I have an entity described by a (generic) URI. Then I have three groups of documents describing that entity, the first uses schema.org, the second group uses org ontology and the third uses foaf. All documents are available as RDF/XML, Turtle and xhtml+RDFa. How does a client that knows only the generic URI for the resource tell the server that it prefers foaf in turtle and what does the server answer?

Best,

Lars

Received on Friday, 8 May 2015 15:45:05 UTC