Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 16:54
    csarven review_requested #333
  • 16:54
    csarven review_requested #333
  • 16:48
    csarven opened #333
  • 16:47

    csarven on 2021-10-27-minutes

    Add 2021-10-27 minutes (compare)

  • 13:56
    jeff-zucker commented #332
  • 12:41
    RubenVerborgh commented #332
  • 12:31
    bourgeoa commented #332
  • 12:21
    bourgeoa commented #332
  • 10:48

    justinwb on main

    Add raw jitsi chat transcript, … (compare)

  • 10:37
    timbl commented #332
  • 10:05
    bblfish commented #227
  • 10:04
    bblfish commented #227
  • 09:50
    timbl commented #332
  • 09:49
    timbl commented #332
  • 08:54

    csarven on main

    Add new TRs (compare)

  • 06:55
    RubenVerborgh labeled #332
  • 06:55
    RubenVerborgh labeled #332
  • 06:55
    RubenVerborgh milestoned #332
  • 06:55
    RubenVerborgh labeled #332
  • 06:55
    RubenVerborgh opened #332
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Solid spec has the same stance.
(I'm not saying this as authority.. just based on discussions/information on the table)
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
@csarven lets say we're talking about an image, identified by a URI
if you request PNG or JPEG, you get a binary representation of the image
you can just as well request and get a different representation, including RDF

https://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#dereference-details

If the URI owner has provided more than one representation (in different formats such as HTML, PNG, or RDF; in different languages such as English and Spanish; or transformed dynamically according to the hardware or software capabilities of the recipient), the resulting representation may depend on negotiation between the user agent and server.

Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Besides the languages, what would be the actual use case to have RDF and non-RDF?
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
images have metadata encoded in them
so do PDFs
you could retrieve that metadata
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
? Those are part of the same representation!
eg EXIF or XMP's RDF/XML are embedded in the host format.
I'm not aware of any server (yet alone a Solid server) extracting that information and making it available as RDF.
Although it'd be kind of cool.
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
so? RDFa is part of HTML, would it not make sense to serve its RDF?
in our case we have separate metadata about non-RDF resources in the triplestore, which gets served when RDF is requested
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
RDFa in HTML/XML-family is recognised as an RDF Source.
Not true for EXIF in JPEG or XMP's RDF/XML in PDF.
Separate data about the non-RDF resource makes sense and it'd be much easier to work with.
Justin Bingham
@justinwb
@sideshowtom as part of the ecosystem work undertaken by the interoperability panel we’re also working on additional classes and properties but it would be in addition to the current base.
Tom Gallivan
@sideshowtom
ok
Justin Bingham
@justinwb
were you looking for clarification on existing terms or considering some new ones for a specific purpose?
Tom Gallivan
@sideshowtom
My question was if that vocab is up to date with the spec work, and I'm getting two answers, 1) @csarven : 'why wouldn't it be, and don't ask here anyway' and 2) @justinwb 'no'. I will go with answer no. 2
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@sideshowtom Excuse me? I answered your question (and gave other important information) in solid/chat and invited you here to follow-up / for future questions. I even asked you again if I missed something because you happened to copy/paste your question as if nothing happened. I have no idea why you would frame all of that as "why wouldn't it be, and don't ask here anyway"... unless of course you have different motive. The context of "2018" is about what you wrote in the forum.
In case still unclear, YES, http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms is still in use by Solid servers and applications. It is also mentioned in the Solid ecosystem document: https://solid.github.io/specification/#namespaces and used in examples in the spec.
Happy to clarify that further.
Tom Gallivan
@sideshowtom
@csarven the question was if it was up to date with the spec work, and it looks to me like the answer is no. That's ok, I was just asking so that I could understand better. As for the rest of it, I think I characterized your answer reasonably. At some point I'll go through this thread again and maybe I'll see it differently. I know you have important work to do here and I don't want to get in the way. I am just a hobbyist here so it is not important anyway, but my motivations areg ood and constructive ones as I believe yours are too.
Tom Gallivan
@sideshowtom
/areg ood/are good/
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn
@csarven re: https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/121#issuecomment-646111470 that all looks fine to me. It would seem very odd to be able to change a resource’s type from RDF to Binary. OTOH, I see no problem with a binary resource (image, etc) being able to respond with RDF via content negotiation.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@acoburn "change" is strange and not a good term to use in context of Solid. In order to do that, a server will need to track original payload's mediatype which would probably end up being similar to LDP server's promise with interaction models. Oops :) Alternatively, the Solid spec doesn't say anything and that would allow RDF and non-RDF representations to be available for the same resource, if so desired.
^ @namedgraph_twitter :)
Vincent
@Vinnl_gitlab

@namedgraph_twitter:

well, RDF representation of PNG is RDF, so you would get what you ask for

Exactly, that's why I don't want to ask for it :) I don't actually want content in a particular format, I want to know what type of content it is (i.e. RDF or not). But I guess this gets particularly problematic when parts of a Resource are RDF and parts aren't :/

Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
you have to accept how HTTP works :)
Ghislain
@gatemezing

@gatemezing Did we already talk about LOV having an inbox to receive notifications about new vocabs or updates to existing ones. You can have a shape for the notification so that can work as a way to register vocabs in LOV

Not yet, but happy to start that discussion - TIA. We just use a "basic bot" for checking some metadata for updates in a vocab and email notification when someone submit a new vocab. BTW, it would be great to have more metadata in the Solid vocab.

Justin Bingham
@justinwb
@csarven i’m a little tied up this am can we catch up a bit over gitter today / this weekend
gotta wrap up something before a session in a couple hours
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
I'll have to review the data interop docs. If I can get to it by Monday, we could go over it in the panel.
Justin Bingham
@justinwb
cool - there will be a push at some point tonight or this weekend with updated vocab, shapes, and shape tree definitions
i’ll let you know when it goes up
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
What's currently using acl:AuthenticatedAgent?
Implementations
namedgraph_twitter @namedgraph_twitter raises hand
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
GOod! I was wondering if you are.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@namedgraph_twitter What are the reasons for LDH to use that? For public reads, does the system require the user to be identified? Is there a setting to turn it on/off?
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
public access and authenticated access is different
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
"public access" doesn't entail anonymous. I'm just trying to understand what the intentions were in your implementation.