- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 08:34:07 +1000
- To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Miika Alonen <miika.alonen@csc.fi>, kcoyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, irene@topquadrant.com, martynas@graphity.org, lehors@us.ibm.com, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
I have raised this topic as a formal ISSUE for the WG to consider. My suggestion is to continue the discussion there on the -wg mailing list only, keeping ISSUE-80 in the subject line. https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/80 Thanks, Holger On 8/13/2015 20:38, Phil Archer wrote: > > > On 13/08/2015 06:44, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> On 8/12/2015 19:09, Phil Archer wrote: >>> Actually, in this case, the test could be: >>> >>> 1. the value of a dcterms:subject property matched >>> /http:\/\/id\.loc\.gov\/authorities\/subjects\/\d+$/ >>> >>> AND >>> >>> 2. an HTTP HEAD request returns a 200 response >> >> Could this be extended so that the HTTP look-up only needs to happen if >> there is no local copy of that namespace, e.g. as a named graph? > > I'd say that was a user choice. In some cases, a local copy would be > preferable for the reasons you say, in others - "have you used the > current concepts defined by authority X?" - can only be tested with a > live look up. The user would then make the choice between the slow > live look up and the quick local check. > > I can >> imagine that many enterprise setups would not want to rely on live data >> from the public internet to look up reference data. If only for >> performance reasons, it should probably be an option to use local copies >> that are updated in regular intervals. Then, if no such named graph >> exists, do the HTTP request as a last measure? > > The live version isn't a fall back: it's the ground truth. So I'm > hoping for a check that the data I have is referring to the external > resources as defined by an external authority. A stage that checked > that a locally held copy was still up to date could precede the > regular validation - HTTP caching would no doubt be useful there. This > seems in line with what Miika is suggesting? > > Phil. > > >> >> Holger >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 22:34:47 UTC