Thanks Steve, I'll continue using the full namespace URI.
I haven't suffered any issues as a result, though I will need to convert my
existing RELS-EXT datastreams to the non-prefix format, to get them all
consistent and simplify my indexUpdate xslt (I'm indexing RELS-EXT with
gsearch + lucene and solr).
If I encounter anything, I'll inform the list.
Thanks for the tips!
Cheers,
Kim
On 5 October 2010 08:33, Steve Bayliss
<stephen.bayl...@acuityunlimited.net>wrote:
> Hi Kim
>
> I don't believe the addRelationship REST API method has any mechanism for
> specifying/declaring namespace prefixes, so I think you will have to use the
> full URI form, as you seem to have discovered.
>
> In terms of the dissemination of either the relationships or the RELS-EXT
> datastream directly, the output seems to be semantically identical in both
> cases (equivalent in both XML and RDF terms) - does it cause you any
> particular issue whether there are namespace prefixes declared or whether a
> default namespace is used for a particular element?
>
> Regards
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Kim Shepherd [mailto:kim.sheph...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 04 October 2010 04:00
> *To:* fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> *Subject:* Re: [fcrepo-user] REST/API-M getRelationships,addRelationships
> and RELS-EXT (correction)
>
> Correction to my very last example -- there should be no colon between the
> encoded namespace and the isPartOf predicate or after the # in the namespace
> shown in the resulting RDF
> (that'll teach me to copy and paste parts of my examples instead of the
> full strings!)
>
> Fixed example:
>
> [...]
>
>
> http://www.example.com:8080/fedora/objects/ampm:801/relationships/new?subject=info:fedora/ampm:801&predicate=info%3Afedora%2Ffedora-system%3Adef%2Frelations-external%23isPartOf&object=info:fedora/ampm:100<http://www.example.com:8080/fedora/objects/ampm:801/relationships/new?subject=info:fedora/ampm:801&predicate=info%3Afedora%2Ffedora-system%3Adef%2Frelations-external%23:isPartOf&object=info:fedora/ampm:100>
>
> ...which seems to result in a working RELS-EXT, although the prefixes are
> still replaced with explicit namespace attributes:
>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#";>
>
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="info:fedora/ampm:801">
> <isMemberOf xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Archive"></isMemberOf>
> <hasModel xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/model#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Media"></hasModel>
> <isPartOf xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:100"></isPartOf>
> </rdf:Description>
>
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> [...]
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kim
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Kim Shepherd <kim.sheph...@gmail.com>
> Date: 4 October 2010 15:52
> Subject: REST/API-M getRelationships, addRelationships and RELS-EXT
> To: fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm mostly using the REST API to manage a Fedora 3.4 instance, and I'm
> getting a bit confused when managing RELS-EXT -- namely, the formatting
> difference I see when retrieving and storing relationships.
>
> Example:
>
>
> http://www.example.com:8080/fedora/objects/ampm:801/datastreams/RELS-EXT/content
>
>
> Gives the following output:
>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:fedora-model="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/model#"
> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"; xmlns:rdfs="
> http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#";
> xmlns:rel="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#" xmlns:myns="
> http://www.nsdl.org/ontologies/relationships#";>
> <rdf:Description
> rdf:about="info:fedora/ampm:801">
> <rel:isMemberOf
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Archive"></rel:isMemberOf>
> <fedora-model:hasModel
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Media"></fedora-model:hasModel>
> </rdf:Description>
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> ...which is what I expect, as that's how the objects were originally
> ingested. Note the namespace specified in the opening rdf:RDF tag and the
> use of prefixes throughout.
>
> And this method:
>
> http://www.example.com:8080/fedora/objects/ampm:801/relationships (using
> GET)
>
> Gives the following output:
>
> <rdf:RDF
> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#";>
>
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="info:fedora/ampm:801">
> <hasModel xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/model#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Media"/>
> <hasModel xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/model#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/fedora-system:FedoraObject-3.0"/>
> <isMemberOf xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Archive"/>
> </rdf:Description>
>
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> If this is just how the /relationship/ method prefers to disseminate the
> RDF, that's fine by me, but where I'm *really* running into trouble is when
> I try to add a new relationship.
>
> If I use a POST like:
>
>
> http://www.example.com:8080/fedora/objects/ampm:801/relationships/new?subject=info:fedora/ampm:801&predicate=rel:isPartOf&object=info:fedora/ampm:100
>
> I get back an HTTP 200 OK response, but the RELS-EXT datastream now looks
> like this:
>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#";>
>
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="info:fedora/ampm:801">
> <isMemberOf xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Archive"></isMemberOf>
> <hasModel xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/model#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Media"></hasModel>
> <isPartOf xmlns="rel:" rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:100"></isPartOf>
> </rdf:Description>
>
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> The removal of prefixes and explicit inclusion of namespaces to each
> element is one thing, but it's also gone ahead and treated rel: as a
> namespace instead of a namespace prefix (I think?!), which breaks stuff.
>
> Never being one to give up, I encoded the full namespace URI and tried
> passing that as a "prefix" when sending my API call:
>
>
> http://www.example.com:8080/fedora/objects/ampm:801/relationships/new?subject=info:fedora/ampm:801&predicate=info%3Afedora%2Ffedora-system%3Adef%2Frelations-external%23:isPartOf&object=info:fedora/ampm:100
>
> ...which seems to result in a working RELS-EXT, although the prefixes are
> still replaced with explicit namespace attributes:
>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#";>
>
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="info:fedora/ampm:801">
> <isMemberOf xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Archive"></isMemberOf>
> <hasModel xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/model#"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:Media"></hasModel>
> <isPartOf xmlns="info:fedora/fedora-system:def/relations-external#:"
> rdf:resource="info:fedora/ampm:100"></isPartOf>
> </rdf:Description>
>
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> Now, I don't particularly mind how this datastream is formatted, as long as
> I can be sure that the Resource Index is happy with it like this, and that I
> know which "prefix" to consistently use when adding new relationships. Will
> I run into bother if I don't use prefixes?
>
> Given that the "GET" relationships method seems to crosswalk between the
> raw RELS-EXT and the prefix-less RDF, was the "POST" method intended to do a
> similar job, so that the raw RDF was able to keep prefixes?
>
> Thanks in advance for any helpful tips! If I'm doing something silly with
> my RELS-EXT please point it out, because I'm fairly new to the Fedora
> Resource Index.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kim
>
> Kim Shepherd
> Te Tumu Herenga
> University of Auckland
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization is moving to the mainstream and overtaking non-virtualized
environment for deploying applications. Does it make network security
easier or more difficult to achieve? Read this whitepaper to separate the
two and get a better understanding.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/hp-phase2-d2d
_______________________________________________
Fedora-commons-users mailing list
Fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
