Hello,We over at Fedora [1] are currently working on how to implement versioning using Memento standards.We're currently planning on using the pattern where the URI-R = the URI-G and the TimeMap would be a separate LDP Container resource.
Given this setup, we'll need to have some information regarding these mementos contained by the TimeMap LDP Container as RDF triples. I'm wondering if anyone has done this before and if so, what RDF ontologies you used to represent the necessary information that's used to create the TimeMap when a GET request is sent to the TimeMap container.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Just to make sure I understand the question correctly:As per RFC7089, Memento TimeMap information is shared using the application/link-format MIME type, not an RDF serialization, see http://mementoweb.org/guide/rfc/#Pattern6.But I assume that you are referring to the internal representation of TimeMap information (URI-R, URI-G, URI-Ms, datetime, mime type, ...) in RDF, to be used in a LDP Container? And that information would then be rendered as application/link-format when it is requested by a Memento client?
CheersHerbert
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Hello Herbert,Just to make sure I understand the question correctly:As per RFC7089, Memento TimeMap information is shared using the application/link-format MIME type, not an RDF serialization, see http://mementoweb.org/guide/rfc/#Pattern6.But I assume that you are referring to the internal representation of TimeMap information (URI-R, URI-G, URI-Ms, datetime, mime type, ...) in RDF, to be used in a LDP Container? And that information would then be rendered as application/link-format when it is requested by a Memento client?Thanks for your response.Yes, you understand my question correctly. This is more about the internal structure, which will be RDF. We will still return the 'application/link-format' MIME type format on a request for TimeMap information. I'm wondering if folks have done this before and what ontologies they may used to represent that data (internally).
Best,BethanyCheersHerbert--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Hello Herbert and All,The conversation around finding or establishing a home ontology for Memento terms continues in the context of the Fedora API Specification:
fcrepo:VersionedResource
becomes ldp:VersionedResource
One suggestion in the above GitHub issue is to define Memento terms in the LDP namespace. However, it would seem that the most logical namespace for the following terms would be in a Memento ontology:
* memento:OriginalResource
* memento:TimeMap
* memento:Memento
* memento:TimeGate
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Hello Herbert and All,The conversation around finding or establishing a home ontology for Memento terms continues in the context of the Fedora API Specification:One suggestion in the above GitHub issue is to define Memento terms in the LDP namespace. However, it would seem that the most logical namespace for the following terms would be in a Memento ontology:
* memento:OriginalResource
* memento:TimeMap
* memento:Memento
* memento:TimeGate
In the short-term, we may need to define the terms in the Fedora ontology... but that would hopefully be a stop-gap measure.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Hi Herbert,
This is great – I’m excited to see this ontology coming together. I just looked through the rdf and had a question about this property:
Link: <http://a.example.org/>; rel="original timegate", <http://a.example.org/?version=20000915112826> ; rel="memento first"; datetime="Tue, 15 Sep 2000 11:28:26 GMT", <http://a.example.org/?version=20100120093433> ; rel="memento last"; datetime="Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:34:33 GMT", <http://a.example.org/?version=all&style=timemap> ; rel="timemap"; type="application/link-format"
<rdf:Property rdf:about="http://mementoweb.org/ns#memento">
<rdfs:label>memento relation type</rdfs:label>
<rdfs:comment>The memento relation type is used to point from a TimeGate or a Memento for an Original Resource, as well as from the Original Resource itself, to a Memento for the Original
Resource.</rdfs:comment>
<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://mementoweb.org/ns#Memento" />
<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://mementoweb.org/ns#TimeGate" />
<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://mementoweb.org/ns#OriginalResource" />
<rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://mementoweb.org/ns#Memento" />
<rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/terms/isVersionOf" />
<rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://mementoweb.org/ns"/>
<rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7089.txt" />
<rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource="https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml" />
</rdf:Property>
This implies a Memento can point to another Memento (?) – can you explain that particular scenario some more (ie, when someone would do that)? I didn’t realize that was possible.
Thanks!
Bethany
I really like what you have proposed here. My only suggestion is that, while memento:memento-datetime is a perfectly legitimate RDF property name, most newer ontologies use camel case for such multi-word names. So might memento:mementoDatetime be a better term for this property?
memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Hi,
Just a very small issue: I noticed that the Turtle representation has a curly quote (line 99), which causes an RDF parser to fail.
On the condition that there is an "original" link between a Memento and an OriginalResource, the following holds:
<mem:Memento ont:isSameWorkAs mem:OriginalResource>
Thanks,
Aaron
On 11/4/17, 5:05 PM, "memen...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Herbert Van de Sompel" <memen...@googlegroups.com on behalf of hvd...@gmail.com> wrote:
hi all,
* I changed memento-datetime to mementoDatetime.
* I got some help to use OWL to express the following:
On the condition that there is an "original" link between a Memento and an OriginalResource, the following holds:
<mem:Memento ont:isSameWorkAs mem:OriginalResource>.
It's the weird stuff in the ontology with the #Y and owl:onProperty and owl:someValuesFrom.
* There are now 3 versions available:
- http://mementoweb.org/ns.rdf
- http://mementoweb.org/ns.ttl
- http://mementoweb.org/ns.jsonld
Early next week we will set up content negotiation with
http://mementoweb.org/ns <http://mementoweb.org/ns> and make sure all mime types etc are correct.
One suggestion in the above GitHub issue is to define Memento terms in the LDP namespace. However, it would seem that the most logical namespace for the following terms would be in a Memento ontology:
* memento:OriginalResource
* memento:TimeMap
* memento:Memento
* memento:TimeGate
In the short-term, we may need to define the terms in the Fedora ontology... but that would hopefully be a stop-gap measure.
I worked on a Memento ontology. The first stab is at
http://mementoweb.org/ns.rdf <http://mementoweb.org/ns.rdf>
Feedback very welcome. I left an open issue in a comment in the ontology doc.
We will eventually put RDF/XML, Turtle, and maybe JSON-LD up there and support content negotiation with
http://mementoweb.org/ns
Cheers
Herbert
Assuming the need for defining the above terms in an RDF ontology, I would like to ask this group's opinion on where those terms should live and if there is interest in collaborating in moving that process forward.
Best regards,
Andrew
On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 8:23:56 AM UTC-4, herbert wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:29 PM, <bse...@amherst.edu> wrote:
Hello Herbert,
Just to make sure I understand the question correctly:
As per RFC7089, Memento TimeMap information is shared using the application/link-format MIME type, not an RDF serialization, see
But I assume that you are referring to the internal representation of TimeMap information (URI-R, URI-G, URI-Ms, datetime, mime type, ...) in RDF, to be used in a LDP Container? And that information would then be rendered as application/link-format when
it is requested by a Memento client?
Thanks for your response.
Yes, you understand my question correctly. This is more about the internal structure, which will be RDF. We will still return the 'application/link-format' MIME type format on a request for TimeMap information. I'm wondering if folks have done this before
and what ontologies they may used to represent that data (internally).
Got it. Early on in the memento work, we actually had an RDF "track" too. But that never made it into the RFC. Robert Sanderson who was still on my team then did some work on that. I will ping him to see whether that work might still be around somewhere,
and, if so, whether it would still be relevant today. I will keep you posted. Or maybe Rob sees this message.
BTW, I also noticed that the W3C Time Ontology made it to proposed recommendation level, see
https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/ That might be relevant in this case too.
Cheers
Herbert
Best,
Bethany
Cheers
Herbert
Best regards,
Bethany
[1]
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
memento-dev...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
memento-dev...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126
==
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memento Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
memento-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.