I noticed a few things in the Github entry that may not be true -- for example, the request to change dc:creator to dc:agent. Although there may be some non-person creators in OL, they should be considered in error. In inputting the data from libraries, there was a conscious separation between persons and institutions (which are coded differently in the data): persons -> creator, institutions -> collaborator.
It would be good to leave creator as is, since it implies, well, creation and/or authorship. dc:agent is too broad, and may make it difficult to get good linking to other data, and definitely will limit inferencing. side note: library data does have institutions/organizations as creators, so having a few of those tagged as creator won't shock most book metadata users. Also, dc:creator isn't limited to persons. kc On 1/30/12 3:55 PM, Ben Companjen wrote: > Hi all, > > I just opened issue 136 on Github, which is a pull request to change > some things in the RDF templates. These things have already been > proposed on this list. One change since my last email: URI references > for Works, Editions and Authors have no trailing "/". > Please see https://github.com/internetarchive/openlibrary/issues/136 > for details. > > I had already opened issue 130 about changing the HTTP behavior when > requesting RDF (actually, for any type). In essence it is about using > 303 redirects instead of 301 or 200 depending on the requested > mimetype. > Please see https://github.com/internetarchive/openlibrary/issues/130 > for details. > > Regards, > > Ben > > On 13 January 2012 23:02, Ben Companjen<[email protected]> wrote: >> Summary of text below: it does matter for RDF to have consistent URIs >> (URI with "/" is different from URI without "/"); using URIs with '/' >> for OL resources fits better in current web server configuration. >> There is content negotiation, but in July 2010 it was suggested to do >> it differently (it is still the same) and it is not as 'Accept'ing as >> I would like. >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> On 13 January 2012 01:52, raj kumar<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 12, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: >>> >>>> I don't remember at this point what this was about, presumably a >>>> comment that came in on the list. It MAY have been a reference to the >>>> URI/Ls in the namespace section of the XML. Since we can't seem to >>>> find a problem, I'd say we should ignore it. If it matters, it'll come >>>> up again. >>> >>> Ah, I remember... Yes, this is specific to Namespace URIs in RDF. >>> >>> Namespace URIs should end in either / or #, so that RDF URI Refs can be >>> constructed by concatenation of the Namespace URI and a local name without >>> adding any separators. >>> >>> This concat operation is defined here: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/ >>> >>> Ben, can you send a pull request with only the change of appending the >>> trailing '/'? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -raj >>> >> Hi Raj, >> >> I'm not sure I understand you here, seeing that all namespace URIs >> already have a trailing / or #. I was talking about other 'URI >> references', the URIs used to identify and make statements about >> resources (Works, Editions and Authors). These are not prefixes, but >> complete URIs. >> >> I looked through the URI RFC<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt>, >> but found no concrete information that >> <http://openlibrary.org/books/OL18215289M/> and >> <http://openlibrary.org/books/OL18215289M> should be interpreted as >> being equivalent (or that they shouldn't). >> Following Lee's analogy: I don't know if "Ben/" should be interpreted >> by RDF agents as being equivalent to "Ben". If they should, in theory >> the discussion about URI references with or without trailing slashes >> is irrelevant, even though I'd say (if they were references to me) I'd >> prefer "Ben". :) >> People >> on<http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/13827/is-a-uri-with-trailing-different-from-uri-without> >> say the identifiers are different. So it is important to be consistent >> in assigning URIs to resources. RDF applications who use the current >> OL RDF output will not be able to link the data from the Work RDF >> (URIs with /) to the data from the Edition RDF (URIs without /). >> >> Following the linked data principles, it would be very nice if one can >> look up the URI of something and get it (e.g. electronic documents) or >> get more information about it (e.g. information about a person). Since >> the resources in the Open Library cannot be transferred via HTTP, we >> only want information about the resources. Redirecting requests for a >> non-information resource using HTTP 303 to its HTML, RDF, JSON etc >> representation, based on the Accept header in the request, is common. >> But you probably know this already. >> Using Wireshark I could see the redirect process happening. When I ask >> for<x/> I get a "303 See Other" to<x>, then when I ask for<x> I get >> "301 Permanently moved" to<x/Title>. This is almost what the Cool >> URIs document describes, only content negotiation is not used - as I >> wrote in a previous email, I am always redirected to the HTML >> representation. >> >> At this point in writing this email, I searched the list archives for >> "http 303" and found a two-message conversation from July 2010 about >> using 303 redirects to<x.rdf> instead of returning RDF/XML when >> requesting<x>. Err, content negotiation is already implemented? So I >> tried "Accept: application/rdf+xml" in a request for<x/> and was >> redirected to<x> and served RDF/XML. D'oh! >> >> That changes what I wanted to say. The mail conversation starts at >> <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00198.html>. Ross >> Singer replies in >> <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00199.html> that >> redirecting to<x.rdf> seems doable. I agree and would like this to be >> implemented. >> I would like to add that better handling of the Accept header would be >> welcome. If I prefer Turtle (q=1) but like RDF/XML almost the same >> (q=0.9), I'm redirected to the HTML with 301 permanently moved. >> >> Finally, getting back to the trailing slashes: although I don't like >> the aesthetics of a trailing /, with this insights, it may be easier >> make all URI references (to OL resources) in the RDF end with a "/". >> >> Apologies for this long answer - I hope I made myself clear, though. :) >> >> Regards, >> >> Ben > _______________________________________________ > Ol-tech mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] -- Karen Coyle [email protected] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet _______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
