Hi Eric,
when I started to record RDF validation requirements from the W3C RDF Validation workshop in 2013
my intention and vision was to have one system which could be used to manage all RDF validation requirements as well as associated use cases, case studies, and tools which are relevant for different domains.
In order to support different views on requirements, use cases, and case studies for multiple domains like DC I introduced views like
- DC case studies: http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=case-studies/dc-case-studies
- DC use cases: http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=use-cases/dc-use-cases
- DC requirements: http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=requirements/dc-requirements
As a consequence each domain can browse the requirements, use cases, and case studies the domain is interested in, but also requirements, use cases, and case studies from other domains.
I would appreciate if you and other W3C RDF data shapes members would use this requirements database (http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation)
in order to record more RDF validation requirements, use cases, and case studies.
Cheers,
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
Website: http://boschthomas.blogspot.com/
GitHub: https://github.com/boschthomas/PhD
________________________________________
Von: DCMI Architecture Forum [[log in to unmask]]" im Auftrag von "Eric Prud'hommeaux [[log in to unmask]]
Gesendet: Freitag, 12. September 2014 10:17
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: alien requirements for DCAP
http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/ is an
excellent aggregation point and I'd like a sense from the community if
aggretating still more use cases and requirements from other domains
would be "worth the noise". In particular, how would y'all feel if
there were stories like this attached to reqs?:
[[
R-2.72 dereferencable value sets
A clinic performing a trial has a data entry program which tests each
input value against a remote terminology hierarchy.
R-3.14 query-able value sets
A clinical value set is impractical to ship over the wire so the
validator ships tuples of input value and value set identifier to a
remote service.
]]
If that doesn't seem so bad, how would you feel about 50? I ask
because there are lots of folks who have thought about requirements
for RDF validation but don't have a place to write them down. We can
create a wiki for this, but then we'd have two lists. We can use yours
but then you end up with all this extra stuff from another domain.
The latter is better for me. Which is better for you?
--
-ericP
office: +1.617.599.3509
mobile: +33.6.80.80.35.59
([log in to unmask])
Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.
There are subtle nuances encoded in font variation and clever layout
which can only be seen by printing this message on high-clay paper.
|