- From: Tobias Käfer <kaefer@fzi.de>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 10:30:48 +0200
- To: <public-solid@w3.org>
Dear all, Am 26.05.25 um 09:56 schrieb Melvin Carvalho: > po 26. 5. 2025 v 9:33 odesílatel Christoph Braun <braun3@fzi.de > <mailto:braun3@fzi.de>> napsal: > On 25/05/2025 08:54, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> čt 22. 5. 2025 v 15:32 odesílatel Christoph Braun <braun3@fzi.de >> <mailto:braun3@fzi.de>> napsal: >> >> I would like to propose dogfooding our own technology. >> >> An app developer wants to build an app: >> - they search the Solid Catalog (or similar to other vocab >> repos [1] ) for suitable vocabularies >> - if they do not find a suitable vocabulary, they create a new >> vocabulary >> - they use their Solid Pod to host the new vocabulary >> - they Link it in/from the Solid Catalog for discovery >> - so other developers can search the Solid Catalog, discover >> the vocabulary and re-use it in their app >> >> Just a small note on the idea of dogfooding vocab publishing via >> personal Pods. It’s a lovely ideal, but maybe a bit too heavy for >> many devs. > > It is lovely indeed. > In particular, because every developer who wants to build a Solid > app can go to solidcommunity.net <http://solidcommunity.net> and > create a Pod there. > Getting a (hosted) Pod is not a problem. > If afraid of tying the vocabulary to a Pod Provider's domain, use > w3id or purl to re-direct whereever the vocabulary is currently hosted. > > For development, just using a test account on solidcommunity.net > <http://solidcommunity.net> is much more convenient than hosting you > own local Pod server instance. > From my project experience (see presentation at Solid World [1]), a > developer of a Solid app creates a test account for testing their > app at some point anyway instead of going through the hassel of > learning how to setup a local Pod. > > > I would caution against this approach to hosting vocabularies. > > - That site is not a CDN, it's a volunteer-run VPS. Heavy traffic can > hit its acceptable-use limits and add latency for many users. > > - Using it for lots of vocabs becomes DDoS vector, which can impact > regular users How often do vocabulary terms get dereferenced? Maybe somebody from w3.org can shed some light on how much of a burden it is to serve [A]. At least, schema information is pretty static [0], so there is ample opportunity to use the caching functionalities of the Web. > - If it runsout of funding, then there are no “Cool URIs.” You can also host your vocabulary on GitHub or GitLab pages, domains with some commercial interest to stick around for a while (and you can even bring your own domain such that you can move elsewhere if they turn rogue). I read that meanwhile they supply the right Content-Type header for Turtle files [3]. Back in the day when they did not have Content-Type text/turtle for .ttl files, the closest I got for standards conformance was RDFa in HTML [1]. This requires devs to write a trivial YAML file and a tiny bit of HTML, and it looks more shiny to the eye non-initiated to the beauty of Turtle. So my +1 for dogfooding and self-hosting vocabularies, there are many ways to achieve it, even for the non-expert. Regards, Tobias [A] https://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns [0] Käfer et al: "Observing Linked Data Dynamics!" Proc. 10th ESWC, 2013 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-38288-8_15 [1] https://kaefer3000.github.io/coinflip-servlet/vocab [2] https://github.com/kaefer3000/coinflip-servlet see _config.yml and vocab.html [3] https://github.com/mfhepp/test_mime_types
Received on Monday, 26 May 2025 08:31:38 UTC