RE: Profiles in Linked Data

Hi Lars,
 
> On May 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de> wrote:
> >
> > I note in the JSON-LD spec it is stated "A profile does not change the
> > semantics
> > of the resource representation when processed without profile knowledge, so
> > that clients both with and without knowledge of a profiled resource can
> > safely
> > use the same representation", which would no longer hold true if the profile
> > parameter were used to negotiate which vocabulary/shape is used.
>
> Yes, I noted that text in RFC 6906, too, but assumed that "unchanged semantics
> of the resource" meant that both representations still describe the same thing
> (which they do in my case). Would a change in description vocabulary really
> mean that I change the semantics of the description?
 
If it is exactly the same information in both representations (but using a
different vocabulary), then you could argue the semantics are not changed.
However I would expect that one representation would contain more/less
information that another and that each vocabulary might have different inference
rules, so indeed then semantics would differ.

>
> If so, I'd be happy to call it not a "profile", but a "shape" instead (thus
> adopting the vocabulary of RDF data shapes).
 
I don't mind what term we use, so long as it is clear to all concerned what is
meant by that term :)

>
> Best,
>
> Lars
 
John