This year's Semantic Technology Conference has a nifty new semantic conference scheduling tool, courtesy of fellow Zepheirans Uche and Eric. Nicely done, guys!
The scheduler allows you to graphically fill out a calendar of sessions that you want to attend. Conflicts are immediately visible. The faceted navigation on the left allows you to find sessions based on tagged data (speaker, company, topic, day, etc). When you are happy, you can import your schedule right into your ical-compliant calendar. I wish all conferences had this.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Monday, February 18, 2008
Beyond Redirection: Rich and Active PURLs
It has been a while since I posted about the new Persistent URL work being done by Zepheira and OCLC. That is partially because the work has gone much more slowly than we had planned. We have been actively gold plating the new PURL server because we are trying to satisfy several communities. The result, though, is laying the foundations for new services for the Web.
The key to the new PURL service is the typing of PURLs. The existing public PURL service at OCLC returns an HTTP 302 (Found) response, causing a Web client to redirect to another URL. The new PURL server allows PURLs to return one of several status codes (301, 302, 303, 310, 404 and 410).
We can go even further, though. The original PURL server had some internal concepts like "cloning" a PURL (basing a new PURL definition on an existing one) and "chaining" a PURL (allowing multi-person management of a URL resolution process). Combining these concepts with the choice of HTTP response codes got us thinking about arbitrary types of PURLs.
We have been experimenting with types of PURLs that combine with other services. A "Rich" PURL, for example, is the combination of a PURL and metadata. We have a prototype service that combine strong identifiers with rich metadata, providing the building blocks for other semantic applications. Rich PURLs are a combination of two related services: A PURL server for management of the resolution and RDF (or other metadata format) file hosting.
The W3C TAG finding regarding the use of HTTP 303 responses seems to suggest that we could use rich PURLs in interesting ways. For example, we could do the following:
A 301 PURL pointing to an RDF resource == Metadata about an information resource
A 303 PURL pointing to an RDF resource == Metadata about a non-information resource (i.e. a physical or conceptual resource)
That usage would be consistent with the TAG finding, even if it goes a bit beyond it.
NB: You can tell if you get a PURL by looking at the PURL header in an HTTP response.
But wait, there's more. What if a PURL pointed to a Web service (in the sense of dynamic content, not necessarily limited to SOA Web Services, but including them)? The combination of a Rich PURL and a metadata reference to a Web service yields an "Active PURL". That is, an Active PURL is a PURL naming a graph of metadata describing a Web service.
Consider a simple Web service like an RSS feed. Placing an Active PURL in front of that feed allows you to describe how that feed should be handled. You could name the facets that you want to use to make an Exhibit or provide any other presentation advice you desired.
Alternatively, an Active PURL might itself by a sort of Web service that provides dynamic metadata about another Web service and can either serve the metadata or redirect to its target service. Such an Active PURL could be used to name a SPARQL graph, accept query parameters for it and return metadata about it, such as a count of results or information on the meanings of columns in the result set. I believe that named graphs are very handy things and something that we as a community are paying inadequate attention to. Given that SPARQL may be the query language that finally integrates our silos of relational databases, fronting them with Active PURLs seems like a promising line of research.
Lists of URLs as proposed by Stu Weibel would be easy to implement as an Active PURL.
Perhaps the most interesting use of Active PURLs to enterprises might be the ability to provide standardized RDF metadata about SOA Web Services as well as relational databases. UDDI is so broken, we might as well fix it with existing SemWeb standards. That is not a new idea, but the application of Active PURLs to the problem is, I think.
The key to the new PURL service is the typing of PURLs. The existing public PURL service at OCLC returns an HTTP 302 (Found) response, causing a Web client to redirect to another URL. The new PURL server allows PURLs to return one of several status codes (301, 302, 303, 310, 404 and 410).
We can go even further, though. The original PURL server had some internal concepts like "cloning" a PURL (basing a new PURL definition on an existing one) and "chaining" a PURL (allowing multi-person management of a URL resolution process). Combining these concepts with the choice of HTTP response codes got us thinking about arbitrary types of PURLs.
We have been experimenting with types of PURLs that combine with other services. A "Rich" PURL, for example, is the combination of a PURL and metadata. We have a prototype service that combine strong identifiers with rich metadata, providing the building blocks for other semantic applications. Rich PURLs are a combination of two related services: A PURL server for management of the resolution and RDF (or other metadata format) file hosting.
The W3C TAG finding regarding the use of HTTP 303 responses seems to suggest that we could use rich PURLs in interesting ways. For example, we could do the following:
A 301 PURL pointing to an RDF resource == Metadata about an information resource
A 303 PURL pointing to an RDF resource == Metadata about a non-information resource (i.e. a physical or conceptual resource)
That usage would be consistent with the TAG finding, even if it goes a bit beyond it.
NB: You can tell if you get a PURL by looking at the PURL header in an HTTP response.
But wait, there's more. What if a PURL pointed to a Web service (in the sense of dynamic content, not necessarily limited to SOA Web Services, but including them)? The combination of a Rich PURL and a metadata reference to a Web service yields an "Active PURL". That is, an Active PURL is a PURL naming a graph of metadata describing a Web service.
Consider a simple Web service like an RSS feed. Placing an Active PURL in front of that feed allows you to describe how that feed should be handled. You could name the facets that you want to use to make an Exhibit or provide any other presentation advice you desired.
Alternatively, an Active PURL might itself by a sort of Web service that provides dynamic metadata about another Web service and can either serve the metadata or redirect to its target service. Such an Active PURL could be used to name a SPARQL graph, accept query parameters for it and return metadata about it, such as a count of results or information on the meanings of columns in the result set. I believe that named graphs are very handy things and something that we as a community are paying inadequate attention to. Given that SPARQL may be the query language that finally integrates our silos of relational databases, fronting them with Active PURLs seems like a promising line of research.
Lists of URLs as proposed by Stu Weibel would be easy to implement as an Active PURL.
Perhaps the most interesting use of Active PURLs to enterprises might be the ability to provide standardized RDF metadata about SOA Web Services as well as relational databases. UDDI is so broken, we might as well fix it with existing SemWeb standards. That is not a new idea, but the application of Active PURLs to the problem is, I think.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Friday, February 08, 2008
GRDDL Article on DevX
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)