Re: Do you use the W3C RDF validator ?

Hi Pierre-Antoine,

I just had a quick 'play' with SoWasm, and indeed I like it a lot (very
simple to use, although it doesn't work with "
http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos-xl#" (even when I explicitly select RDF/XML
as the content type (see my note about this vocab below!))).

So yeah, I'd be happy to use this tool as my go-to validator/converter,
especially as it's open-source, and presumably it's open to extension to
include upcoming features in RDF 1.2, like RDF-star. And so I'd also
support it replacing the current validator (which I've never used anyway!).

Cheers,

Pat.

My notes on "http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos-xl#":
    # Unfortunately, the SKOS-XL vocab doesn't support content negotiation
    # properly at all. It basically ignores all content types and just
returns
    # RDF/XML *unless* the content-type contains 'text/html' (regardless of
    # any 'q' values provided at all), in which case it returns HTML
    # containing two RDFa triples. So unfortunately we need to work around
    # this exception, and make sure we don't request 'text/html' at all for
    # just this vocab (and since it only returns RDF/XML otherwise, we might
    # as well explicitly ask for that).


*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 28, 2023 at 10:22 AM Pierre-Antoine Champin <
pierre-antoine@w3.org> wrote:

> Thanks to everyone who responded.
>
> I realize that in my response to Vincent, below, I forgot to paste the
> link, which created confusion. So, there it is:
>
> I'm currently working on this:
>
>     https://champin.net/2023/sowasm/
>
> which was initially intended as a demo for Sophia (a, RDF Rust library
> that I'm developing).
>
> If such a demo could serve as a satisfactory replacement for the current
> old validator, I'm happy to adapt it to fulfill that role.
>
> Note that our intention is not to give up on providing a reference
> validation service for RDF, but more to get a sense of how much the
> community is actually relying on it, and what the needs are.
>
>   best
> On 23/11/2023 19:20, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote:
>
>
> On 23/11/2023 15:42, Vincent Emonet wrote:
>
> (...)
> From my point of view:
> - A minimal modern validator should at least enable users to provide RDF
> in various format (the classic xml, turtle, trig, n3, nquads, ntriples,
> ideally it could even support JSON-LD).
> - And it should enable users to convert from any formats to any other
> format (if you can do parsing, you can also do serializing, so why not
> doing both?)
> - Ideally it should be implemented to work fully on the client (because
> decentralization, and scalability, and we have now good JS/wasm options to
> parse in the browser now), so that it can be deployed to any CDN without
> the cost of hosting a server. If people needs an API we can find a way to
> setup a client-side API (look like an API, query like an API, but execution
> on the client)
>
> you mean, something like that ? :-)
>
> (disclaimer: this is a very rough and early prototype)
>
> The reason I asked the 2nd point was precisely to determine whether this
> prototype could be a satisfactory replacement from the current ageing
> validator.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Vincent
>
>
> Le mer. 22 nov. 2023 à 13:46, <hans..teijgeler@quicknet.nl
> <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>> a écrit :
>
>> Hi Pierre-Antoine,
>>
>>
>>
>> I use the IDLab Turtle Validator <http://ttl.summerofcode.be/>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards, Hans
>>
>

-- 
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.