I agree with Adrian's technology, but since many people work with
"required/optional" is there a way we can make these synonyms for those
cardinality constraints?
kc
On 7/22/14, 2:49 AM, Adrian Pohl wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 21.07.2014 18:19, Bosch, Thomas wrote:
>> Hi Evelyn, hi all,
>>
>> -Required Classes: so far, we do not have such a requirement
>>
>> -Non-repeatable Properties: so far, we do not have such a requirement
>
> Regarding required, optional, repeatable, non-repeatable properties:
> Doesn't it suffice if you have a way to express minimum, exact and
> maximum cardinality? IMO, if these cardinality requirements are
> fulfilled you can describe - amongst others - the
> required/optional/repeatable cases:
>
> - "required" is the same as minCardinality=1
> - "optional" is the same as minCardinality=0
> - "repeatable" can be expressed as a maxCardinality of >1 or not
> defining a maximum cardinality at all.
> - non-repeatable could be expressed with exactCardinality=1 or
> maxCardinality=1.
>
> If I see this right, I guess it wouldn't make sense to adress
> cardinality and required/optional/repeatable properties seperately in an
> AP vocabulary. Thus, we might somehow structure these requirements in
> the database to make it easier to maintain an overview.
>
> Adrian
>
>> -Non-repeatable Classes: What does this mean? Are you on the instance
>> level? I.e. that there can be only (at most) one instance of a specific
>> class in an RDF graph?
>>
>> -Properties that are not part of the model: do you mean something like
>> ‘disallowed properties’? Properties that should not be allowed to be
>> stated in an RDF graph?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>> --
>>
>> Thomas Bosch, M.Sc. (TUM)
>>
>> PhD student
>>
>> GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
>>
>> Social Science Metadata Standards
>>
>> Visitors Address: B2,1, D-68159 Mannheim
>>
>> Postal Address: P.O.Box 12 21 55, D-68072 Mannheim
>>
>> Tel: + 49 (0) 621 / 1246-271
>>
>> Fax: + 49 (0) 621 / 1246-100
>>
>> Web: http://www.gesis.org <http://www.gesis.org/>
>>
>> Website: http://boschthomas.blogspot.com/
>>
>> GitHub: _https://github.com/boschthomas/PhD_
>>
>> *Von:*DCMI Architecture Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> *Im Auftrag von *Evelyn Dröge
>> *Gesendet:* Montag, 21. Juli 2014 16:03
>> *An:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Betreff:* Re: Database of Requirements on RDF Validation:
>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation
>>
>> Hi Thomas, hi all,
>>
>> thank you again, Thomas and Kai, for creating the database. I think this
>> is a good help to structure and compare our use cases!
>>
>> I have some direct questions which I would like to discuss with you and
>> others that work with the database.
>>
>> I could not find suitable requirements for the following cases:
>>
>> - Required Classes (similar to R-68 Required Properties; could be
>> connected to the use case for non-repeatable classes)
>>
>> - Non-repeatable Properties (opposite of R-70 Repeatable Properties; or
>> can this requirement used for both?)
>>
>> - Non-repeatable Classes
>>
>> - Properties that are not part of the model (and should not be ingested,
>> see UC-15)
>>
>> Do you have (or has anyone else) an idea how this could be linked to
>> exisiting requirements? Otherwise I would suggest to expand the
>> requirements collection.
>>
>> Another question: I have a case where I find it hard to distinguish
>> between requirements. This relates to UC-24 (Property value match; EDM)
>> and UC-9 (Wrong Mime Types in DM2E). Should these use cases be connected
>> with R-37 or with R-92 (or both)?
>>
>> Thanks for your help!
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Evelyn
>>
>> Am 17.07.2014, 13:00 Uhr, schrieb Bosch, Thomas <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm new to this mailing list and I would like to indoduce myself.
>> My name is Thomas Bosch and I'm a PhD student in Computer Science in
>> my fourth year now.
>>
>> I'm part of the editorial board of the DCMI RDF Application Profiles
>> Task Group [1],
>> whosepreliminary fields of work are (1) RDF Constraint Specification
>> and Validation, (2) Definition of an RDF Application Profile, and
>> (3) Request handling for RDF APs and data.
>>
>> Together with Kai Eckert (University of Mannheim), we created a
>> database of requirements on RDF constraint formulation and
>> validation, which is publicly accessable via
>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation
>> and extensible by the community.
>>
>> During the last half year, we identified more than 180 requirements
>> on RDF validation.
>> Sources have been (1) the 2013 W3C RDF Validation Workshop, (2) your
>> valuable mailing list discussions, (3) the 2013 Semantic Web in
>> Libraries conference,
>> (4) discussions in the RDF Application Profiles Task Group, and (5)
>> diverse research papers.
>>
>> The idea of this extensible database is
>> (1) to collect and describe case studies from experts (from theory
>> and practice dealing with RDF validation problems) and the general
>> public,
>> (2) to extract common use cases from these case studies that
>> illustrate particular problems,
>> (3) to specify requirements to be fulfilled in order to adequately
>> solve these problems and meet the use cases,
>> (4) to investigate existing best-practices regarding these
>> requirements, and
>> (5) to evaluate existing approaches / tools to which extend specific
>> requirements are fulfilled.
>>
>> Using this approach, we try to structure the requirements
>> engineering process for RDF validation.
>> I see that there is currently a lot of discussion about requirements
>> on RDF validation on this maling list, which I tried to capture in
>> the requirements DB as well.
>>
>> The contributors of the DCMI RDF Application Profiles Task Group are
>> currently adding further case studies, use cases, requirements, and
>> relationships between these entities to the database.
>> This should be a work done for and from the community dealing with
>> RDF validation issues.
>>
>> The full source code of the system and the database with the current
>> state of all requirements is also available:
>> https://github.com/kaiec/reqbase
>> You can easily set up a local version for own developments.
>>
>> Do you think this is the right way to go?
>> Do you have further ideas?
>>
>> We hope this kind of contribution could be helpful for the community.
>>
>> Thank you very much and I really enjoy the valuable discussions on
>> the mailing list
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Thomas
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/RDF-Application-Profiles
>>
>> --
>>
>> Thomas Bosch, M.Sc. (TUM)
>>
>> PhD Student
>>
>> GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
>>
>> Social Science Metadata Standards
>>
>> Visitors Address: B2,1, D-68159 Mannheim
>>
>> Postal Address: P.O.Box 12 21 55, D-68072 Mannheim
>>
>> Tel: + 49 (0) 621 / 1246-271
>>
>> Fax: + 49 (0) 621 / 1246-100
>>
>> Web: http://www.gesis.org
>>
>> Website: http://boschthomas.blogspot.com/
>> GitHub: _https://github.com/boschthomas/PhD_
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Evelyn Dröge
>>
>> Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
>> Berlin School of Library and Information Science
>> - Digitised Manuscripts to Europeana (DM2E) -
>> Sitz: Dorotheenstraße 26, D-10117 Berlin
>> Post: Unter den Linden 6, D-10099 Berlin
>> Tel.: +49 30 2093-4265
>>
>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> www.ibi.hu-berlin.de <http://www.ibi.hu-berlin.de> | dm2e.eu
>>
>
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
|