Uploaded image for project: 'OASIS OSLC Lifecycle Integration Core (OSLC Core) TC'
  1. OASIS OSLC Lifecycle Integration Core (OSLC Core) TC
  2. OSLCCORE-142

OSLC Core 3.0 should not mandate any particular RDF serialization format

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Component/s: Core
    • Labels:
      None
    • Proposal:
      Hide

      Change:

      4.4.1 OSLC Services must provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource.

      4.4.2 OSLC Services should provide and accept RDF/XML representations for each OSLC resource.

      4.4.3 OSLC Services may provide and accept existing standard or emerging standard formats such as XML, HTML, and the Atom Syndication Format.

      To:

      4.4.1 OSLC Services MUST provide and accept some standard RDF serialization format (e.g., application/rdf+xml, text/turtle, application/ld+json, etc.) representations for each OSLC resource.

      4.4.2 OSLC Servers SHOULD support HTTP content negotiation to provide and accept OSLC resources in any standard RDF serialization format.

      4.4.3 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept RDF/XML representations for each OSLC resource to be compatible with OSLC 2.0 clients.

      4.4.4 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource to be compatible with [[!LDP]].

      4.4.5 OSLC Services MAY provide and accept existing standard or emerging standard formats such as XML, HTML, and the Atom Syndication Format.

      Show
      Change: 4.4.1 OSLC Services must provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource. 4.4.2 OSLC Services should provide and accept RDF/XML representations for each OSLC resource. 4.4.3 OSLC Services may provide and accept existing standard or emerging standard formats such as XML, HTML, and the Atom Syndication Format. To: 4.4.1 OSLC Services MUST provide and accept some standard RDF serialization format (e.g., application/rdf+xml, text/turtle, application/ld+json, etc.) representations for each OSLC resource. 4.4.2 OSLC Servers SHOULD support HTTP content negotiation to provide and accept OSLC resources in any standard RDF serialization format. 4.4.3 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept RDF/XML representations for each OSLC resource to be compatible with OSLC 2.0 clients. 4.4.4 OSLC Services SHOULD provide and accept text/turtle and application/ld+json representations for each OSLC resource to be compatible with [ [!LDP] ]. 4.4.5 OSLC Services MAY provide and accept existing standard or emerging standard formats such as XML, HTML, and the Atom Syndication Format.

      Description

      The actual RDF serialization format is not something that OSLC should even need to address. OSLC should only specify that the resources are represented as any standard RDF format. The reason is that no OSLC client should ever depend on a specific resource serialization representation, and they should utilize RDF parsers that support any standard representation. Otherwise interoperability suffers.

      Now unfortunately this is not the case. Some tools rely on RDF/XML with inlined resources, even going so far as to expect the results to be in RDF/XML-ABBREV, something that isn't even a standard. These clients may use XPath or other lexical mechanisms to "parse" these RDF/XML files for their convenience, and to avoid using RDF parsers. So we have to deal with this.

      For OSLC, interoperability with 2.0 clients and servers is more important than whether RDF/XML, Turtle or JSON-LD is the serialization format. Since we know there are implementations that are limited to RDF/XML, then we should continue to support that in OSLC 3.0 and the domain specifications.

      OSLC Core 3.0, and the OSLC domain specifications change all references to specific RDF serialization formats to SHOULD, and document in the clause why. Clients and servers SHOULD support Turtle and JSON-LD because they are simpler, more readable representations mandated by LDP. Clients and Servers SHOULD support RDF/XML because it is required by OSLC 2.0 and there are many existing clients and servers you might want to integrate with.

      Now what the servers provide is not over-specified and is left to what they need to provide in their broader execution environment.

        Attachments

          Activity

            People

            • Assignee:
              jamsden James Amsden
              Reporter:
              jamsden James Amsden
            • Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated: