Re: In Solid apps, let’s stop using RDF terms that 404

Yes sorry, I meant https://w3id.org.
This is just about RDF terms (classes and predicates), for shapes you can
use one of the existing shape repos as we discussed in
https://forum.solidproject.org/t/solid-stm-about-shape-repo-s/8819.

Besides https://w3id.org we could also use our own little system aimed at
Solid app developers, with a submission form that asks for the term name
and a short comment, asks the developer to authenticate with their WebID,
and then publishes it with one click, for instance at
https://ns.solidcommunity.net/ which I just created. But we want to give
developers multiple tools. Opening a PR at
https://github.com/solid/vocab/pulls will also still be an option but
because that repo requires 3 reviews, it can take quite some time and
effort to publish a term there. I recently went through the process of
getting a few terms added to https://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns# and the
process for that was back-and-forth emails with W3C staff (thanks for
getting it sorted, Pierre-Antoine!), so that proves that using
https://www.w3.org as a namespace host is also still an option for Solid
app developers, but I wouldn't recommend it.

We just want to create more options and less friction! :)


Cheers,
Michiel

On Thu, 22 May 2025 at 13:07, Rui Zhao <rui.zhao@cs.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

> Sorry I didn't make it yesterday due to a clashing overrun meeting. The
> consensus seems very reasonable. Hope to read the more structured version
> of it (like what others have mentioned). I also have the following specific
> comment.
>
>
> On 5/22/25 08:06, Michiel de Jong wrote:
>
>
> For newly proposed terms let’s advise app devs and spec devs to publish
> them at the same time they publish their app or spec, using something like
> webId.org instead of leaving them undocumented for months or years, stuck
> in unreviewed PRs or in unmaintained vocabs.
>
>
> Do you mean to use webid.org (guess you meant w3id.org?) (or alike
> services) as the URL (domain part) for the new terms/vocabulary/ontology?
>
> Probably useful to see some clarification:
>
> What should be placed at the URL when accessing it?
>
> Should there be an ontology / OWL file, RDFS specification, SHACL shape,
> or an HTML document?
>
> If an HTML document *and* a specification are both required (or heavily
> suggested), are there any suggested hosting services that supports this?
>
>
> E.g. W3C's PROV-O supports *both* HTML and RDF specification at its
> namespace https://www.w3.org/ns/prov#, differentiated by the Accept
> header of the request.
>
> I'm aware Solid is able to convert between different RDF serializations
> with the same method, but HTML is a different thing.
>
> Best,
>
> Rui
>