add an indexing# namespace for indexing-related values in fedora #13

acoburn · 2015-01-14T22:17:59Z

https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/FCREPO-1285

This is a straw-man implementation of a http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config# namespace

Comments welcome!

escowles · 2015-01-15T13:39:57Z

config.rdf

+        <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">Ontology for user-defined configuration properties and classes on Fedora-curated resources.</rdfs:comment>
+    </owl:Ontology>
+
+    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config#hasIndexingTransform">


Shouldn't this be a DatatypeProperty? The range is literal, and in the current implementation it is a path segment treated as a string.

Yes, I believe it should be a DatatypeProperty. Also, the range should be rdf:resource="&xsd;string"

👍 sounds right to me.

Also, this property should be hasIndexingTransformation as per the documentation: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/FEDORA40/External+Search

acoburn · 2015-01-15T19:13:19Z

config.rdf

+
+    <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config#hasIndexingTransformation">
+        <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">has indexing transformation</rdfs:label>
+        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://fcrepo.info/definitions/v4/repository#Container"/>


should the domain for the hasIndexingTransformation property be repository:Container or repository:Resource? Practically speaking, it seems that repository:Container is correct, but should it be less restrictive?

The correct domain is "indexing:Indexable", or "config:Indexable", which is what it seems to have been called here.

Wait, the implication here is that the only reason to transform something is to index it. Is that truly the only reason? Or are we open to transforming Containers that aren't Indexable for other purposes?

No, the implication is that the only reason that something possesses an "indexing transformation" is because it is indexable. We have no language for general "tranformability" because, under the current rules of the transform API, any resource with an RDF representation available at its URI is transformable, at least as I understand the matter. We may wish to introduce such language, but that's a separate concern from "indexability". In fact, we could probably profit from revisiting the transform API and trying to generalize it.

Incidentally, this kind of confusion is why I voted against compressing "auxiliary" predicates and types into a grab-bag "config" namespace.

@ajs6f, did I miss your vote against a config# namespace here: #12 ?

Right. So we can do that by establishing a standard for indexing
"sidecars". That would include an ontology (much like the one we're now
using) and possibly some common understanding of the workflow implied by
the use of predicates and types in that ontology. Then, when I decide to do
something odd like create an indexing component using Apache UIMA for
feature extraction from images, I can just supply it as a "standardized"
part that will work with UCSD's systems.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Esmé Cowles notifications@github.com
wrote:

In config.rdf
#13 (diff):

+
+
+<rdf:RDF

xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"

xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"

xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"

xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config#">

<rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Fedora Commons Configuration Ontology/rdfs:label

<rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">Ontology for user-defined configuration properties and classes on Fedora-curated resources./rdfs:comment

/owl:Ontology

<owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config#hasIndexingTransformation">

<rdfs:label xml:lang="en">has indexing transformation/rdfs:label

<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://fcrepo.info/definitions/v4/repository#Container"/>

I hadn't thought of the config ontology as an SPI, but I do see indexing
as a common repository sidecar, and think it makes sense to encourage
implementations to be interoperable. I agree that indexing is a separate
concern from the repository, and another implementation might have no need
these entities, or for indexing at all. But if they do, then they should
use the same mechanism for configuring it, and be interoperable with other
Fedora components. For example, if the community supports fcrepo-camel, but
UCSD decides to maintain fcrepo-message-consumer instead, they should use
the same entities to configure which objects should be indexed, and how.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/fcrepo4/ontology/pull/13/files#r23234040.

@ajs6f what would you think of a proposal to publish an indexing# ontology in the fedora.info domain?

Or do you see that as being the responsibility of repository implementations?

I think that's a fine idea. (Although I'm honestly not too clear on the
differences between fcrepo.org, fedora.info, etc.) And if we were to do
that, it would make a lot of sense for the "source" for that published
ontology to be managed here, in its own repo, and paralleled by some
documentation on the wiki explaining what an indexing component should do
to respect the use of that ontology.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Aaron Coburn notifications@github.com
wrote:

In config.rdf
#13 (diff):

+
+
+<rdf:RDF

xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"

xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"

xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"

xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config#">

<rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Fedora Commons Configuration Ontology/rdfs:label

<rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">Ontology for user-defined configuration properties and classes on Fedora-curated resources./rdfs:comment

/owl:Ontology

<owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/config#hasIndexingTransformation">

<rdfs:label xml:lang="en">has indexing transformation/rdfs:label

<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://fcrepo.info/definitions/v4/repository#Container"/>

@ajs6f https://github.com/ajs6f what would you think of a proposal to
publish an indexing# ontology in the fedora.info domain?

Or do you see that as being the responsibility of repository
implementations?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/fcrepo4/ontology/pull/13/files#r23256067.

@ajs6f when you write "in its own repo", do you mean separately from the fcrepo4/ontology github repository?

Good point-- I was mixing up the various levels of hierarchy available in Git/GitHub. I suppose I mean that we could either:

Subdivide this repository with folders for "repository ontologies", "indexing ontologies", etc. This would have to evolve as the ontologies evolve with the HTTP API specs.

Start a new "indexing SPI" repository and put the indexing ontology there. This is probably better, because there might be additional resources for that SPI, beyond the ontology.

acoburn · 2015-01-22T17:14:57Z

As discussed in the 1-22-15 tech call, this will be implemented in an indexing# namespace, not a config# namespace.

acoburn · 2015-01-22T18:07:56Z

@ajs6f @escowles does this correctly represent what we have discussed?

Note that this departs from the current use and documentation of the indexing namespace in that I define the owl:class as indexing:Indexable (rather than indexing:indexable).

escowles · 2015-01-23T00:35:57Z

👍 looks good to me

ajs6f · 2015-01-23T14:11:34Z

I'm not seeing anything here that we couldn't do with RDFS. Is there some reason to use OWL instead?

ajs6f · 2015-01-23T14:13:30Z

indexing.rdf

+
+    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://fedora.info/definitions/v4/indexing#">
+        <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Fedora Commons Indexing Ontology</rdfs:label>
+        <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">Ontology for user-defined indexing properties and classes on Fedora-curated resources.</rdfs:comment>


We might want to use other language than "user-defined", because that's a little ambiguous here. Maybe just something like "Ontology for indexing configuration in Fedora repositories"?.

acoburn · 2015-01-23T14:24:24Z

@ajs6f RDFS would also work for this -- I used OWL just out of habit.

ajs6f · 2015-01-23T14:26:00Z

Let's do RDFS, on the principle of "least power".

acoburn · 2015-01-23T16:56:10Z

@ajs6f @escowles This is the latest iteration of the indexing# ontology, implemented as RDFS. Please comment!

acoburn · 2015-01-23T16:59:54Z

pom.xml

@@ -47,6 +45,20 @@
              <transformationSet>
                <dir>.</dir>
                <includes>
+                  <include>indexing.rdf</include>


This section depends on an rdfs2html.xsl file, which was not included in the commit. Should I revert that change or simply include the XSLT from @escowles ?

@acoburn Go ahead and include that file.

@escowles Thanks so much!

@acoburn, I am not yet seeing the rdfs2html.xsl file. Have you yet to commit it or am I missing something?

I haven't added it yet. It will come with the next commit -- it needed a bit of modification to work with rdf:Property and rdfs:Class

@awoods -- the file is there now.

…s; adjusted XSL templates for proper HTML output

acoburn · 2015-01-23T19:26:57Z

OK. Let's try this again.

I've added an RDFS implementation of the indexing# vocabulary with rdf:Property and rdfs:Class. I have also added an rdfs2html.xsl document, somewhat modified from @escowles version, which included tidying up the HTML so that it matches the output from owl2html.xsl. I also split the owl2html.xsl into two documents -- keeping all of the owl-specific parsing in the original document, and moving the /index template stuff into its own file. Maven, etc has been updated so that

mvn xml:transform

should work properly.

acoburn · 2015-01-23T19:35:04Z

rdfs2html.xsl

+      <xsl:value-of select="substring-after(@rdf:about,$about)"/>
+    </xsl:variable>
+    <xsl:if test="$id != ''">
+      <h3 id="{$id}"><xsl:value-of select="$id"/></h3>


actually, this should be <h4> in order to match the owl2html formatting

awoods · 2015-01-23T20:31:40Z

Great. Is everyone happy? Are all comments addressed?
If so, I will push it through.
Thanks for working through the details, @acoburn.

ajs6f · 2015-01-23T20:35:22Z

I think we're in good shape to move forward. Next week, I'll find something else about which to complain endlessly.

awoods · 2015-01-23T20:36:03Z

It would be worrisome if you didn't.

awoods · 2015-01-23T20:48:49Z

Resolved with: d13033b

add a config: namespace for user-defined values in fedora

00cdc49

escowles reviewed Jan 15, 2015
View reviewed changes

updated PR in response to suggestions from @escowles

708b47f

acoburn reviewed Jan 15, 2015
View reviewed changes

defined an indexing# namespace

2f903a0

acoburn changed the title ~~add a config: namespace for user-defined values in fedora~~ add an indexing# namespace for indexing-related values in fedora Jan 22, 2015

ajs6f reviewed Jan 23, 2015
View reviewed changes

implemented indexing# namespace document in RDFS

a12322a

acoburn reviewed Jan 23, 2015
View reviewed changes

reimplemented indexing ontology in RDFS without RDF:Description block…

9151adf

…s; adjusted XSL templates for proper HTML output

acoburn reviewed Jan 23, 2015
View reviewed changes

updated HTML header rendering to make it consistent with owl2html

b38beb6

awoods closed this Jan 23, 2015

acoburn deleted the add-config-ns branch October 4, 2015 01:43

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

add an indexing# namespace for indexing-related values in fedora #13

add an indexing# namespace for indexing-related values in fedora #13

acoburn commented Jan 14, 2015

escowles Jan 15, 2015

acoburn Jan 15, 2015

escowles Jan 15, 2015

acoburn Jan 15, 2015

acoburn Jan 15, 2015

ajs6f Jan 15, 2015

escowles Jan 15, 2015

ajs6f Jan 15, 2015

awoods Jan 16, 2015

ajs6f Jan 20, 2015

acoburn Jan 20, 2015

ajs6f Jan 20, 2015

acoburn Jan 20, 2015

ajs6f Jan 21, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 22, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 22, 2015

escowles commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f Jan 23, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f commented Jan 23, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 23, 2015

acoburn Jan 23, 2015

escowles Jan 23, 2015

acoburn Jan 23, 2015

awoods Jan 23, 2015

acoburn Jan 23, 2015

acoburn Jan 23, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 23, 2015

acoburn Jan 23, 2015

awoods commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f commented Jan 23, 2015

awoods commented Jan 23, 2015

awoods commented Jan 23, 2015

add an indexing# namespace for indexing-related values in fedora #13

add an indexing# namespace for indexing-related values in fedora #13

Conversation

acoburn commented Jan 14, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

acoburn commented Jan 22, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 22, 2015

escowles commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f commented Jan 23, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

acoburn commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f commented Jan 23, 2015

acoburn commented Jan 23, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

acoburn commented Jan 23, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

awoods commented Jan 23, 2015

ajs6f commented Jan 23, 2015

awoods commented Jan 23, 2015

awoods commented Jan 23, 2015