- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.stonybrook.edu>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 06:11:42 -0500
- To: Nicholas Car <nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com>
- CC: public-rif-dev@w3.org,geosparql.swg@lists.opengeospatial.org,cawelty@gmail.com
- Message-ID: <33EAF008-2C3D-4CB7-9BC3-A595A2EDB1B4@cs.stonybrook.edu>
Yes, Sandro is the best person to talk to about it. -- Sent from my mobile. On January 6, 2021 5:14:26 AM EST, Nicholas Car <nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com> wrote: >Follow-up to the assertion about the use of "Probably rifps+xml": > >The appendix on RIF Media Type registration [1] states: > >"This media type [application/rif+xml] is intended to be shared with >other >RIF dialects, to be specified in the future. Interoperation between the >dialects is governed by the RIF specifications." > >I find this hard to follow since Presentation and Abstract Syntaxes are >_not_ XML. Not sure what to do here. I will contact the original >proponent - Sandro Hawk - about this. > >Nick > > >[1] >https://www.w3.org/TR/rif-core/#Appendix:_RIF_Media_Type_Registration > >On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 7:53 PM Nicholas Car < >nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com> wrote: > >> Hi Michael, >> >> Thanks for your response points. We will investigate validation with >RIF4J >> if and only if we make further use of RIF than just this one document >and >> the corresponding one for GeoSPARQL 1.1 we will surely produce. >> >> Regarding the Media Type "application/rif+xml": I make take it upon >myself >> to register this, if we make wider use of RIF. >> >> Regarding your assertion that the Media Type for Presentation Syntax >> documents is "Probably rifps+xml", as in "application/rifps+xml", >well it >> can't be since the Presentation Syntax is clearly not XML! It would >perhaps >> have to be "text/rifps" or similar. If I take on the above, I make >take on >> this one too. >> >> Regards, >> >> Nick >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 7:38 PM Michael Kifer ><kifer@cs.stonybrook.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for your email. Some answers within. Hope somebody else can >fill >>> in the gaps in my answers. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 1/3/21 9:51 PM, Nicholas Car wrote: >>> >>> Dear RIF Dev Mailing list, >>> >>> We, the GeoSPARQL Standards Working Group, are updating the OGC's >>> GeoSPARQL specification, first published in 2012 which we refer to >as >>> GeoSPARQL 1.0. We wish to better present the specification in >>> machine-readable form and to update it producing GeoSPARQL 1.1. >>> >>> GeoSPARQL 1.0 includes a template for a set of RIF rules [1]. We >would >>> like to expand this template to produce a RIF artifact that can be >included >>> in the set of GeoSPARQL 1.0 resources. We will also produce a >GeoSPARQL 1.1 >>> RIF artifact within the next few months. >>> >>> Please could you assist us with the following points: >>> >>> 1. Validity of our 1.0 RIF document >>> a. We have not been able to find any operating RIF validators >listed >>> by the RIF WG [2] other than perhaps RIF4J [3]. Can you indicate >others, in >>> particular, any that are online? >>> >>> >>> It seems that RIF4J is the only validator that is still available. >>> >>> >>> >>> b. Have any multi-format RIF validators been produced, >specifically >>> for XML and Presentation Syntax? >>> >>> >>> See above. >>> >>> >>> >>> 2. Presentation of our 1.0 RIF document >>> a. The Media Type "application/rif+xml" is indicated for use for >RIF >>> documents [4] but it is not registered with IANA's Media Types list >[5]. >>> Can you clarify the status of the RIF Media Type? >>> >>> >>> This was the intent. The working group chairs were supposed to see >to it >>> that the media types are registered, but apparently didn't. >>> >>> >>> >>> b. Assuming a RIF document in XML is to use the Media Type >>> "application/rif+xml" and the file extension ".rif", what should a >>> Presentation Syntax document use? Should it use ".rifps" for the >file >>> extension, as per WG examples like [6] but then what Media Type? >>> >>> >>> Probably rifps+xml. Again, somebody was supposed to do it, but >dropped >>> this task. >>> >>> >>> c. We intend to present the RIF artifacts for GeoSPARQL 1.0 and >1.1 >>> online with persistent URIs that will resolve and communicate >resource >>> Media Types via HTTP Content Negotiation. We could present multiple >media >>> types for the same artifact (RIF in XML & Presentation Syntax). Does >this >>> have precedent in the RIF community? >>> >>> >>> This sounds reasonable. I do not recall seeing a precedent though. >>> >>> >>> >>> Next I include a snippet of our RIF document below. It is highly >>> repetitive so I have only included the first 2 ForAll elements. >>> >>> >>> The snippet looks good. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Michael Kifer >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- >>> Document ( >>> Prefix (geo <http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#>) >>> Prefix (geof <http://www.opengis.net/def/function/geosparql/>) >>> >>> Group ( >>> # geo:sfEquals >>> Forall ?f1 ?f2 ?g1 ?g2 ?g1Serial ?g2Serial ( >>> ?f1[geo:sfEquals->?f2] :- >>> Or ( >>> # feature – feature rule >>> And ( >>> ?f1[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g1] >>> ?f2[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g2] >>> ?g1[geo:gmlLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?g2[geo:gmlLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> # feature – geometry rule >>> And ( >>> ?f1[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g1] >>> ?g1[geo:gmlLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?f2[geo:gmlLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> # geometry - feature rule >>> And ( >>> ?f2[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g2] >>> ?f1[geo:gmlLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?g2[geo:gmlLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> # geometry - geometry rule >>> And ( >>> ?f1[geo:gmlLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?f2[geo:gmlLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> ) >>> ) >>> >>> # geo:sfEquals >>> Forall ?f1 ?f2 ?g1 ?g2 ?g1Serial ?g2Serial ( >>> ?f1[geo:sfEquals->?f2] :- >>> Or ( >>> # feature – feature rule >>> And ( >>> ?f1[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g1] >>> ?f2[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g2] >>> ?g1[geo:wktLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?g2[geo:wktLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> # feature – geometry rule >>> And ( >>> ?f1[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g1] >>> ?g1[geo:wktLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?f2[geo:wktLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> # geometry - feature rule >>> And ( >>> ?f2[geo:hasDefaultGeometry->?g2] >>> ?f1[geo:wktLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?g2[geo:wktLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> # geometry - geometry rule >>> And ( >>> ?f1[geo:wktLiteral->?g1Serial] >>> ?f2[geo:wktLiteral->?g2Serial] >>> External(geof:sfEquals (?g1Serial,?g2Serial)) >>> ) >>> ) >>> ) >>> >>> # repetition of the ForAll elements for all GeoSPARQL >relations >>> >>> ) >>> ) >>> ---------- >>> >>> Any further comments on our use of RIF would be greatly appreciated >too! >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Nicholas >>> -- >>> Dr Nicholas J. Car >>> Data Systems Architect >>> SURROUND Australia Pty Ltd >>> >>> GeoSPARQL QG member >>> >>> References >>> --------------- >>> [1] GeoSPARQL 1.0. http://www.opengis.net/doc/IS/geosparql/1.0. See >>> Clause 11, p 30. >>> [2] None of the other validators listed at >>> https://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Implementations seem to be online >>> other than perhaps RIF4J >>> [3] http://rif4j.sourceforge.net/ >>> [4] https://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_In_RDF#Namespaces >>> [5] https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml >>> [6] >>> >https://www.w3.org/2005/rules/test/repository/tc/Class_Membership/Class_Membership-premise.rifps >>> >>> >> >>
Received on Wednesday, 6 January 2021 11:12:04 UTC