- From: <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 00:21:20 +0200
- To: "Michael Steidl (IPTC)" <mdirector@iptc.org>
- Cc: "'simon.steyskal'" <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>, nmihindu@fi.upm.es, 'W3C POE WG' <public-poe-wg@w3.org>
Simon, all,
Have you tested the methods from the Swagger documentation?
http://odrlapi.appspot.com/apidoc/index.html
I have not been able to reproduce the "firewall" problem, but I guess
it is a CORS problem.
Victor
vrodriguez@fi.upm.es escribió:
> Hi Michael,
>
> The first time you try, it can take long (30secs?); and you may have
> to reload the page.
> Successive tests are fast. If still it does not work, I would like
> to see the text you are trying :)
>
> Thanks for testing!
> Víctor
>
> "Michael Steidl (IPTC)" <mdirector@iptc.org> escribió:
>
>> Hi Victor and Simon,
>>
>> thanks for being behind this issue.
>>
>> This morning I’ve thrown the JSON-LD of Example 16 into the sandbox
>> – and the spinner is spinning, and spinning …
>>
>> Maybe a tiny particle is missing.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>> From: vrodriguez@fi.upm.es [mailto:vrodriguez@fi.upm.es]
>> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 8:09 PM
>> To: simon.steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
>> Cc: Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org>; nmihindu@fi.upm.es;
>> 'W3C POE WG' <public-poe-wg@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: ODRL Validator document - communication considerations
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Simon: Thanks a lot! Perfect!
>> Now everything works smoothly.
>>
>> Michael: You can now try the normalizer/validator
>> http://odrlapi.appspot.com/ even with JSON-LD
>>
>> At least I just tried this as input:
>>
>> {
>> "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl.jsonld",
>> "@type": "odrl:Set",
>> "@id": "http://example.com/policy:1010",
>> "target": " <http://example.com/asset:9898>
>> http://example.com/asset:9898",
>> "permission": [{
>> "action": "odrl:reproduce",
>> "assigner": "http://example.com/assigner:88",
>> "duty": [{
>> "action": "odrl:attribute",
>> "attributedParty": "http://example.com/owner:9898"
>> }]
>> }],
>> "prohibition": [{
>> "action": "odrl:translate"
>> }]
>> }
>>
>> And I got the correct output:
>>
>> <http://example.com/policy:1010>
>> a odrl:Set ;
>> odrl:permission [ a odrl:Permission ;
>> odrl:action odrl:reproduce ;
>> odrl:assigner <http://example.com/assigner:88> ;
>> odrl:duty [ a
>> odrl:Duty ;
>> odrl:action
>> odrl:attribute ;
>> odrl:attributedParty
>> <http://example.com/owner:9898>
>> ] ;
>> odrl:target <
>> <http://example.com/asset:9898> http://example.com/asset:9898>
>> ] ;
>> odrl:prohibition [ a odrl:Prohibition ;
>> odrl:action odrl:translate ;
>> odrl:target <
>> <http://example.com/asset:9898> http://example.com/asset:9898>
>> ] .
>>
>>
>> Although perhaps it should return JSON-LD if the input is JSON-LD.
>>
>> Víctor
>>
>> "simon.steyskal" <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at
>> <mailto:simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at> > escribió:
>>
>>> try "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl.jsonld",
>>> as context
>>> Sent from Samsung tablet.
>>> -------- Original message --------From: vrodriguez@fi.upm.es
>>> <mailto:vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> Date:
>>> 9/15/17 19:06 (GMT+01:00) To: Simon Steyskal
>>> <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at <mailto:simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at> > Cc:
>>> "Michael Steidl (IPTC)"
>>> <mdirector@iptc.org <mailto:mdirector@iptc.org> >,
>>> nmihindu@fi.upm.es <mailto:nmihindu@fi.upm.es> , 'W3C POE WG'
>>> <public-poe-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-poe-wg@w3.org> > Subject: Re:
>>> ODRL Validator document -
>>> communication considerations
>>> can you copy the example?
>>> I selected as input data "JSON-LD" and copied directly the example 1
>>> with little success:
>>>
>>> {
>>> "@context": {
>>> "odrl": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/"
>>> },
>>> "@type": "odrl:Set",
>>> "@id": "http://example.com/policy:1010",
>>> "permission": [{
>>> "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
>>> "action": "odrl:read"
>>> }],
>>> "prohibition": [{
>>> "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
>>> "action": "odrl:reproduce"
>>> }]
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at
>>> <mailto:simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at> > escribió:
>>>
>>>> easy rdf worked for me..
>>>> this happens usually when certain properties aren't properly defined
>>>> in the context file
>>>> simon
>>>> -------- Original message --------From: vrodriguez@fi.upm.es
>>>> <mailto:vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> Date:
>>>> 9/15/17 18:45 (GMT+01:00) To: "Michael Steidl (IPTC)"
>>>> <mdirector@iptc.org <mailto:mdirector@iptc.org> >,
>>>> nmihindu@fi.upm.es <mailto:nmihindu@fi.upm.es> Cc: 'W3C POE WG'
>>>> <public-poe-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-poe-wg@w3.org> > Subject:
>>>> Re: ODRL Validator document -
>>>> communication considerations
>>>> Nandana, Michael,
>>>>
>>>> I need your help here,
>>>>
>>>> When I introduce the JSON-LD examples of the IM spec in the
>>>> http://www.easyrdf.org/converter or in
>>>> http://rdf-translator.appspot.com/ I get no result (almost empty). Can
>>>> you please remind me what else had to be done to do the conversion?
>>>> Libraries (ODRLAPI, Jena) also fail...
>>>>
>>>> I have modified the http://odrlapi.appspot.com to understand also
>>>> RDF/XML and JSON-LD but first I need good working examples...
>>>>
>>>> Víctor
>>>>
>>>> {
>>>> "@context": {
>>>> "odrl": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/"
>>>> },
>>>> "@type": "odrl:Set",
>>>> "@id": "http://example.com/policy:1010",
>>>> "permission": [{
>>>> "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
>>>> "action": "odrl:reproduce",
>>>> "assigner": "http://example.com/assigner:88",
>>>> "duty": [{
>>>> "action": "odrl:attribute",
>>>> "attributedParty": "http://example.com/owner:9898"
>>>> }]
>>>> }],
>>>> "prohibition": [{
>>>> "target": "http://example.com/asset:9898",
>>>> "action": "odrl:translate"
>>>> }]
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> "Michael Steidl (IPTC)" <mdirector@iptc.org
>>>> <mailto:mdirector@iptc.org> > escribió:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Victor,
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks for your work on an ODRL Validator (and Evaluator) and
>>>>> creating the
>>>>> document at https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Validation
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking into that document raised for me some issues regarding how to
>>>>> communicate ODRL related to the IM of the CR:
>>>>>
>>>>> * A key issue from my point of view is that the IM shows
>>>>> all examples
>>>>> only in JSON-LD, while the Validator doc shows only Turtle
>>>>> syntax. A person
>>>>> who reads the IM will get familiar with the JSON-LD syntax - and its
>>>>> specialities - and it may be hard to transform this quickly into
>>>>> Turtle in
>>>>> the reader's head.
>>>>> * Question: could we recommend a web service for
>>>>> translating JSON-LD
>>>>> into Turtle to support such readers?
>>>>> * Terminology: (goal: using the same terms in the IM and
>>>>> the Validator
>>>>> document)
>>>>>
>>>>> * Normalization 3: Applying inheritance rules
>>>>> The IM does not use the term "inheritance rules" but "inheritance
>>>>> mechanism"
>>>>> - is it ok, to adopt that?
>>>>> * Normalization 4. Interiorizing policy-level properties
>>>>> This section is about IM section 2.7.1. headlined "Compact
>>>>> Policy" and this
>>>>> is included "It is RECOMMENDED that compact ODRL Policies be expanded to
>>>>> atomic Policies when being processed for conformance."
>>>>> I suggest to name this section 4: "Expanding Compact Policies"
>>>>> * Normalization 5. Expanding from compound to irreducible Rules
>>>>> Section 2.7 in the IM names the target of expanding compounded properties
>>>>> the "atomic equivalent".
>>>>> - the target "Rules" in the current heading is wrong, this IM
>>>>> section only
>>>>> talks about properties.
>>>>> - I suggest to name this section 5: "Expanding compound Rule
>>>>> properties to
>>>>> atomic equivalents"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's all, thanks for considering.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael
Received on Monday, 18 September 2017 22:21:45 UTC