Hello.
On 19.11.2015 06:09, Karen Coyle wrote:
> All,
>
> For those of you who will be at SWIB2015 next week in Hamburg, we are
> set up with a breakout session on Tuesday from 16:00 - 17:30.[1] We'd
Before the breakout sessions there will be a 30 min slot for lightning
talks. Thus, only one hour is scheduled for the breakout sessions: from
16:30 to 17:30 (see also
http://etherpad.lobid.org/p/swib15-breakout-sessions ). I hope this will
suffice for the group meeting, otherwise you might stretch it a bit as
the day's programme ends with the breakout sessions.
As this group hasn't heard anything from me for a year, I want to
apologize for not having contributed anymore without giving any notice.
I had a lot to do privately (renovating, moving house, getting a new
family member in May...). But more important, the AP work became much
less relevant for building the OER Worldmap.
When the work started in February 2014 the hbz was actually working on a
project (buidling a propotype for an OER world map) that used some kind
of application profile as a central document for defining a data model
and its presentation in an application as well as some data constraints.
The project ended in April 2014 and we haven't done any practical work
with RDF application profiles since.
Although we were awarded to build the actual OER worldmap in December
2014, we didn't assign such a central role to an AP as we did in the
prototype. Instead, as the actual application is based on JSON-LD, we
use the JSON-LD context to document the used properties for the
"outside" world and JSON schema [1] for validating the data posted to
the API. If anyone is interested, our current schema can be seen at [2].
So far, this approach works well for us, it might be one thing you might
speak about under agenda point 4).
Looking forward to seeing you at SWIB.
Adrian
[1] http://json-schema.org/
[2]
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hbz/oerworldmap/master/public/json/schema.json
> like to propose a somewhat directed discussion of the related W3C work,
> both SHACL and ShEx, with the goal of discussing:
>
> 1) Do either of these replace the DCMI DSP?
> 2) Are they compatible enough with the DCMI DSP that we can make
> connections?
> 3) Do they fulfill our stated requirements for application profile
> functionality?
> 3) Do we, as DCMI, want to put our support on one or both?
> 4) Are there other developments that we should be watching?
>
> and finally
>
> 5) What does this mean for the DCMI RDF AP group? Have we completed our
> task, or do we see more that we should do given our discussion?
>
> This is probably more than we can get through in 1.5 hours, but we will
> definitely reserve time for #5.
>
> Preparation for the meeting:
>
> Two documents to read (or at least scan - good travel reading!):
> 1) SHACL Editor's Draft [2] at least through section 5 (Dated Nov. 13,
> 015 or later)
> 2) Shape Expressions Schemas [3] dated 16 Nov 2015.
>
> (For your convenience, I have PDF'd & zipped them. Attached. Not sure
> they'll make it through the mailing list, tho'. Also, the W3C document
> may be best viewed in HTML at [2]. - kc)
>
> Karen will attempt to create a set of talking points that compare the
> two based on the points above, to get the discussion going, but we rely
> on you all to come with ideas. Our suggestion is that you read these
> looking at how well they meet your current needs for validation, how you
> judge their ease of use, and how you see them fitting into workflows
> that you know.
>
> See you all soon in Hamburg!
> kc & Antoine
>
> [1] http://etherpad.lobid.org/p/swib15-breakout-sessions
> [2] http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/
> [3] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1510.05555v2
--
Adrian Pohl
hbz - Hochschulbibliothekszentrum des Landes NRW
Tel: (+49)(0)221 - 400 75 235
http://www.hbz-nrw.de
|