- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:24:19 +0100
- To: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
- CC: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4B0A7EF3.4020204@w3.org>
Heh:-) I was asking myself exactly the same question:-) That is why I asked Greg to give an example... I guess sd:Service sd:defaultDataset [ ... ] . (which is the current example) can also say sd:Service sd:defaultDataset <URI> . but I realized that does not necessarily sound right. <URI> is clearly not the URI of the dataset itself, but a description thereof. So the term's name is not really fine... Again, I think an example would clarify Greg's thoughts... Ivan Alexandre Passant wrote: > Hi, > > On 21 Nov 2009, at 00:08, Gregory Williams wrote: > [skip] >> >> * Added URL variants of the above two terms: sd:defaultDatasetURL and >> sd:availableDatasetURL. These are meant to allow linking not to the >> dataset description directly but to a dereferencable document that >> contains such descriptions. This allows the service description to be >> kept small while providing access to very large dataset descriptions. > > I'm not sure I understand the different between the dataset description > and a document that contains the description. > It seems that the second one (the document about the description) is > what we should get when we dereference the first one (the URI of the > description) so why do we need a new property / URI here ? > > Alex. > >> >> * Added sd:defaultGraph term for linking a sd:Dataset with a >> description of the default graph in a dataset. For now I'm leaving the >> rdfs:range of this term open, allowing vocabularies like voiD to do it >> themselves. >> >> >> I'd like to get some feedback on these changes from the group. In >> particular, I'm curious about people's feelings on two issues: >> >> (1) should the use of sd:availableDataset imply that the endpoint will >> only allow use of the named graphs in FROM/FROM NAMED clauses, or >> could it be used simply to link to locally cached/generated >> descrptions of commonly used datasets? If the latter, we (or somebody >> else) could coin a sd:feature IRI to indicate that an endpoint has the >> ability to dereference graph URLs. >> >> (2) How do people feel about the URL variants of the dataset >> properties? I know several people had indicated that they wanted a way >> to link to dataset descriptions without including them in the service >> description and these terms were created to satisfy that need. >> However, the logistics of actually using the terms feel a bit strange >> to me (do you just search for any dataset instance in the retrieved >> RDF similar to how foaf:PersonalProfileDocument is used?) and there >> are other ways this could be handled (we might assume that if a >> dataset description isn't in the SD RDF then the dataset IRI is >> dereferencable and will return the description). >> >> Thoughts? >> >> thanks, >> .greg >> >> >> [1] Whiteboard darwing of the dataset description modeling from F2F2: >> <http://thefigtrees.net/lee/dl/sparql-IMG00009-20091103-1508.jpg>. The >> the unlabeled blue arc should be "default graph". >> >> > > -- > Dr. Alexandre Passant > Digital Enterprise Research Institute > National University of Ireland, Galway > :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> . > > > > > > > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 23 November 2009 12:24:55 UTC