W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > August 2015

Re: SKOS concept scheme URIs as values for constraints

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 16:50:31 -0700
Message-ID: <55CD2D47.9040407@kcoyle.net>
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Holger,

many people who are on the public-rdf-shapes list are not on the 
public-data-shapes-wg list. In fact, this was originally posted to the 
rdf-shapes list, and I reply/copied it to the -wg list to make sure that 
it was visible to the WG. I realize that so far we've discussed issues 
only on the -wg list, but participants in the public list may wish to be 
part of this discussion.

I don't know if WG members are automatically signed up to the rdf-shapes 
list, but rdf-shapes is given on the wiki page as the list for public 
comments and discussion, so I assume we'll be using that list for 
comments and discussion on the draft.

kc

On 8/13/15 3:34 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 23:51:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:42 UTC