Re: Do you use the W3C RDF validator ?

Hi Pierre-Antoine,

I *regularly* need to validate RDF vocabs that I stumble across online (or
more likely just convert to more human-readable Turtle (but to 'convert' it
needs to first parse, which is in itself a form of validation). But my
go-to validator/converter tool has always been "EasyRDF Converter":
https://www.easyrdf.org/converter
(I love it's ease-of-use - i.e., just paste in any RDF IRI and click Submit
(only sometimes goes it's content-type guessing/sniffing need to be
overridden explicitly)).

So I don't think I've used the W3C validator, ever, and just playing with
it now (and having to go find an explicitly RDF/XML vocab to point it too
(I had to use "https://www.w3.org/2009/08/skos-reference/skos-xl.rdf"
explicitly, as using "http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos-xl#" resulted in an
error ("Empty document, ignored."), maybe due to the tool not following the
multiple redirects!?)), I don't think I ever would find a use for it as it
is today (so long as EasyRDF's Converter keeps existing).

But that raises an important point - I have no idea if EasyRDF's Converter
will be extended to support RDF-star serializations (it doesn't today). If
not, then things look tricky, as I definitely believe an easy-to-use
validator (and (just personally) a converter) are crucially important (so I
must try and reach out separately to the developer of EasyRDF Converter!).

As for the separate "accessing as an API" question - no, I've never used an
online validator (or converter) for that. If writing code at all, I'd rely
on any of the well maintained RDF libraries to parse (i.e., 'validate') any
RDF for me locally (e.g., Jena or RDF4J in Java, N3.js in JavaScript, etc.).

Cheers,

Pat.


*Pat McBennett*, Technical Architect

Contact  | patm@inrupt.com

Connect | WebID <http://pmcb55.inrupt.net/profile/card#me>, GitHub
<https://github.com/pmcb55>

Explore  | www.inrupt.com




On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 9:41 AM Pierre-Antoine Champin <
pierre-antoine@w3.org> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> the code behind the W3C RDF validator [1] is old and unmaintained. W3C
> is considering decommissioning that service.
>
> My first question is: how many people in this community are relying on
> that service ? My intuition is that the answer is "not many", but if I'm
> wrong, we might reconsider our decision.
>
> My second question is: for those who use that service or a similiar one
> : would a purely client-size option be acceptable ? In other words, are
> you using it exclusively in a browser, or are you accessing it as an API
> from other programs?
>
>    best
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
>
>

-- 
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the 
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged, confidential 
and/or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this e-mail (or the person responsible for delivering this document to the 
intended recipient), please do not disseminate, distribute, print or copy 
this e-mail, or any attachment thereto. If you have received this e-mail in 
error, please respond to the individual sending the message, and 
permanently delete the email.