- From: Michael Compton <Michael.Compton@csiro.au>
- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 10:43:30 +1100
- To: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
- CC: "public-xg-ssn@w3.org" <public-xg-ssn@w3.org>
Nice work. Good to see that we can (almost) pass these various validation tools. I think we should we add links in the report (say in the intro or conclusion of either the whole report or the ontology section) for these and indicate how the ontology passes through pellet lint. Michael On 08/11/2010, at 9:11 , Alexandre Passant wrote: > Hi all, > > I've made a few sanity tests to check the current SSN ontology > > * Compliance with the LOD principles, using Vapour [1] > > Some tests fail here. > > http://validator.linkeddata.org/vapour?vocabUri=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.oclc.org%2FNET%2Fssnx%2Fssn&classUri=http%3A%2F%2F&propertyUri=http%3A%2F%2F&instanceUri=http%3A%2F%2F&defaultResponse=dontmind&userAgent=vapour.sourceforge.net > > - 1st request while dereferencing resource URI without specifying > the desired content type (HTTP response code should be 303 > (redirect)):Failed > => AFAIK, purl allows to specify a 303 rather than a 302 when > redirecting, so that should be easy to fix > > - 2nd request while dereferencing resource URI without specifying > the desired content type (Content type should be 'application/rdf > +xml'):Failed > => That can be fixed on the /2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/images/3/36/ > folder with a .htaccess file, containing > > AddType application/rdf+xml .xml > > * Semantic / syntactic validation, using Sindice inspector [2] > > 100% OK > > http://inspector.sindice.com/inspect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.oclc.org%2FNET%2Fssnx%2Fssn&content=&doTriplesValidation=1&doSyntaxValidation=1 > > Hope that helps, > > Alex. > > [1] http://validator.linkeddata.org/ > [2] http://inspector.sindice.com/ > > -- > Dr. Alexandre Passant > Digital Enterprise Research Institute > National University of Ireland, Galway > :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> . > > > > > > >
Received on Sunday, 7 November 2010 23:44:02 UTC