The initial aim of this was to counter an apparently arbitrary
repository ranking algorithm (which I won't deign link to) with a set of
web standards that we (repository developers and maintainers) can
collectively work towards, with an emphasis on breadth of different
standards that could be applied.
--
I've greyed out the 'everything' requirement, since I'm not sure that
'everything' is script-testable.
I've grey'ed out the content negotiation requirements since I'm not
aware that any repositories or prototypes that try and do this (I'm
happy to be corrected).
I've found a better URL for the RDFa requirement.
cheers
stuart
On 13/09/14 22:58, Hugh Glaser wrote:
The messages below should make sense.
Stuart is trying to make a doc for rating repositories.
I’ve added some stuff about Linked Data:
From http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html (Linked Data Principles)
Everything has a URI - publications, documents, people, organisations,
categories, ...
These URIs are HTTP or HTTPS
When RDF is requested, the URIs return RDF metadata
RDF/XML supported
N3 supported
Turtle supported
JSON-LD supported
There are URIs that are not from this repository
There are URIs from other repositories
There is a SPARQL endpoint
RDFa is embedded in the HTML
Is there somewhere I could have taken this from that would be suitable?
Anyone care to contribute?
It seems like it is a really useful thing to have (modulo a bit of
specialisation for any particular domain).
(I didn’t want to go over the top on formats, by the way.)
Cheers
Begin forwarded message:
From: Stuart Yeates <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: testable properties of repositories that could be used to rate them
Date: 13 September 2014 10:31:36 BST
To: Hugh Glaser <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
I notice there is nothing about Linked Data and Semantic Web - would it be
sensible to have something on this?
If there's something that's recommended by some standard / recommendation and
is script-testable, you're welcome to add it.
So for example does it provide RDF at all?
It has a question based on http://validator.w3.org/feed/ which validates RSS,
which in turn is either RDF (v1.0) or can trivially be converted to it
(v2.0/atom). I've added a note that this is RSS.
cheers
stuart
Begin forwarded message:
From: Hugh Glaser <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: testable properties of repositories that could be used to rate them
Date: 12 September 2014 14:05:34 BST
To: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: Hugh Glaser <[email protected]>
Very interesting (and impressive!)
I notice there is nothing about Linked Data and Semantic Web - would it be
sensible to have something on this?
Well, actually there is Semantic Web:- right up at the start there is a Cool URI
reference, which is the the W3C "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web” note!
Perhaps there should be a section on this - maybe starting with with whether it
is 5* Linked Data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_data
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
But it probably useful to unpick some of this in a less structured way.
So for example does it provide RDF at all?
Formats? RDF, N3, JSON-LD…
Best
Hugh
On 12 Sep 2014, at 03:29, Stuart Yeates <[email protected]> wrote:
A couple of us have drawn up a bit of a list of script-testable properties of
repositories that could be used to rate them. We’re tried to both avoid
arbitrary judgements and the implication that every repository should meet
every item:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sEDqPS2bfAcbunpjNzHwB56f5CY1SxJunSBLFtom3IM/edit
cheers
stuart
