Re: APIs and interoperability

Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com> writes:

> Jonas Liljegren mentions what I shall call "model-level"
> interoperability.  This is more difficult to characterize than those
> above, but I think it's important enough to try.  Roughly it means
> that two different RDF applications represent the same information
> using the same set of RDF triples (possibly modulo some simple
> equivalence rules).  This means that information generated by one
> application can be understood by another application, possibly with
> intermediate processing using standard (application-neutral) RDF
> tools.

I think that the most important part of the interoperability is to
establish a common schema for the metadata used in the system.

Wraf is designed to be self referential.  Every aspect of the system
is (will be) represented by a resource.  This includes transactions,
session, queries, models, selections, date stamps, function calls,
cache statistics and much more.

The interoperability is not about using the same API. It's about using
the same schema.  The interoperability of two systems can be measured
by the the schemas they both support.

Some systems will only support the RDF schema.  Others will include
support for the RDFS schema.  These are the things that define the
framework for the internal behaviour of the system.

I would like us to add another schema that defines the metadata we all
use in our implementations.  why not start with #Model and it's
properties.  What is the origin of the model?  When was it stated?  Is
it 'closed' or can it be changed?  And every simple search operation
results in a query result. I call it #Selection.  Also this could be
specified in the schema.


-- 
/ Jonas Liljegren

The Wraf project http://www.uxn.nu/wraf/
Sponsored by http://www.rit.se/

Received on Friday, 17 November 2000 11:34:37 UTC