Talk:RdfValidationWorkshop/Papers/Gerber Cole Lowery
From Semantic Web Standards
Using SPARQL to Validate Open Annotation RDF Graphs
Anna Gerber (firstname.lastname@example.org) Timothy W. Cole (email@example.com) David Lowery (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Dave Reynolds - full - use cases and requirements, technologies and solutions
- Complete use case and deployed solution for validation against the Open Annotation ontology, based on extensible SPARQL rules. Use case, examination of prior art and the eventual solution seem like just the right scale to look at in the workshop - non-trivial but bounded.
- Antoine Isaac - full (or lightning) - use cases and requirements, technologies and solutions
- The case and solution are well worked out, clearly worth being reported at the workshop. Perhaps saving some space in figure 1 and introducing a second example of rule would bring even more value to the paper. My (very slight) doubt about full presentation comes from two issues: first, how the system handles formal semantics and reasoning. The authors don't say what they do in this respect, and in the precondition in Figure 2 the first member of the UNION actually implies the second (since the domain of oa:hasTarget is oa:Annotation), making thus the latter useless, if reasoning is applied. The second issue is the role of pre-conditions. I've not understood why they are needed: they could just be put in the WHERE clause (at least in the one example in the paper). They are of course useful to generate 'rule not applicable' messages, as the authors tell. But the authors don't present this as *the* requirement that motivates pre-conditions. On both issues, the authors' approach is not clearly wrong, of course. But the lack of acknowledgement of these issues may leave the audience puzzled.