1. I've been digging deeper into OWL and there does appear to be a way to express the kind of information we are putting in our Shape resources, e.g. cardinality. The OWL way is somewhat more complex - it involves class restrictions. Our Shape approach is easier for clients to handle. I think we should at least describe the semantics of Shape in terms of OWL so we are compatible. We may be able to regard Shape as a simplified form for the equivalent OWL.
2. Our use of Dublin Core namespace prefixes seems a little inconsistent with common practice. We are using the newer terms namespace, http://purl.org/dc/terms/ instead of the legacy elements namespace http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/. However, the usual prefix for the terms namespace seems to be dcterms: while the elements namespace uses dc:. I suggest we adopt this convention and use dcterms: as the predefined and recommended prefix. See [1] "So as not to affect the conformance of existing implementations of "simple Dublin Core" in RDF, domains and ranges have not been specified for the fifteen properties of the dc: namespace (http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/). Rather, fifteen new properties with "names" identical to those of DCMES Version 1.1 have been created in the dcterms: namespace (http://purl.org/dc/terms/). " 3. I think we should establish or identify a best practice for services that provide access to resources through both http and https. In this case, the same resource is being made available at two different URLs. The resource should have one preferred URI which appears in the resource representations, is used for links, etc. If we don't establish a preferred URI then queries, etc. could get complex. Anyone have experience with this situation? [1] http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/ Regards, ___________________________________________________________________________ Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management IBM Software, Rational Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063 Twitter | Facebook | YouTube
