- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 16:50:31 -0700
- 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