Hi Evelyn, hi all,
the requirements
-
R-37-ALLOWED-VALUES-FOR-RDF-LITERALS
-
R-92-LITERAL-VALUE-RESTRICTION
are different.
With ‘R-37-ALLOWED-VALUES-FOR-RDF-LITERALS’ you can state an enumerated list of allowed RDF literals.
With ‘R-92-LITERAL-VALUE-RESTRICTION’ you can specify a class. Instances of this class must be connected to specific RDF literals via a specific
data property.
For example you can specify a class containing all individuals that are connected by :hasAge to the integer 17 – i.e. all persons of age 17.
Best,
Thomas
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
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)?
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],
whose preliminary 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
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]
www.ibi.hu-berlin.de | dm2e.eu