I have been looking for reconciliation services with ontorefine in graphDB. In the following link
https://medium.com/wallscope/linked-data-reconciliation-in-graphdb-cd2796d2870b reconciliation is performed with the DBpedia endpoint. I want to reconcile with another endpoint. What are those other endpoints that I could reconcile with? Are they the same ones that OpenRefine uses? like VIAF, wikidata and others. Or can I use any endpoint?
You can add external reconciliation in the OntoRefine. Click on the column you want to reconcile -> Reconcile -> Start reconciling -> Add standart service.
You can use any reconciliation server (endpoint) in OntoRefine.
In addition:
We've developed a VIAF recon server that's much better than previously existing ones. It takes into account name variants, parses out nationality and occupation, and sorts candidates by some "importance" metrics. We have not yet deployed this as we're looking for a client.
You can implement recon over RDF data, using the same framework that the above VIAF server uses (which is based on mapping RDF props to Lucene/Elastic and using its "similar" functionality). Again, we're looking for a client or pretext to release this framework as part of GraphDB.
OntoRefine is not just a reskinned and rebranded version of OpenRefine, but it adds the ability to render tabular data as RDF (like the obsolete DERI extension):
either by a mapping UI or SPARQL
either for download or direct insert (materialization) to GraphDB (using INSERT over internal federation)
Since it's proprietary and closed source, it's hard to say for sure, but "OntoRefine" appears to be just a reskinned and rebranded version of OpenRefine, so I assume that it can use all the same reconciliation services.
You can find a list of OpenRefine reconciliation services here: https://reconciliation-api.github.io/testbench/
Confirming what Konstantin and Tom wrote, you can use any Reconciliation service with OntoRefine. I've added 3 lists of such services at https://openrefine.org/download.html:
https://github.com/OpenRefine/OpenRefine/wiki/Reconcilable-Data-Sources : maybe a bit older but more descriptive
https://reconciliation-api.github.io/census/services/ : software
https://reconciliation-api.github.io/testbench/#/ : online services
Related
So this backend will be consumed by an ad-hoc front end application. But will also be integrated by other systems and we will expose API for them.
When designing the rest I see that there is ONE database table (we call it for table A) that can join many other tables, lets say about 10 to 20 other tables.
Now, my strategy would be to build routes in my backend that will "reason" according to the ad-hoc frontend we have.
So if there is a page in the frontend (let's call this page for page1) that requires to get rows from the table A but also fields from let's say 3 other join tables, then I want to create a route in the backend called maybe "page1" which will return rows from table A and also from the other 3 tables.
This is of course an ordinary way to build a backend. But as it will also be used by other systems then somebody could argue that these systems maybe don't have any need for the route "page1". Their frontend will maybe never build a "page1".
So according to people here, it would better to build the API more agnostically. And instead of creating the route "page1" I should build it according to "hateoas". And if I understand that principle, instead of letting my ad-hoc frontend to request the resource "page1" it would request "pageForTableA". And then, the resource "pageForTableA" should return which are the possible table to be joined.
In this case, for my frontend's page1, I would need to make 4 subsequent request to the server, instead of one like I would like to do if there was a "page1" resource in the backend.
What do you think?
I also see a thirt strategy. I don't know if there is a name for this pattern but it would be this way:
A resource in backend that returns only rows from table A. BUT, the route also takes arguments. And the argument is an array with the name of all the other tables someone want to include.
So if frontend calls:
getTableA(array('tableB', 'tableD', 'tableF'))
Then the resource would include/join the tables B, D and F. In short: API resource let's the frontend decide what it want to get delivered.
Which of these 3 strategies are best do you think? Or there is some more that could be taken in consideration?
You need to architect your API in a way that consumers shouldn't know about how the data is stored in the underlying data store.
Furthermore, if you want to allow consumers to decide which fields you want to project in the response, you could give them using some query string format.
BTW, maybe you should avoid re-inventing the wheel. There's a standard called Open Data (OData) which already defines a lot of things like you already require in your API, and since it has been made by Microsoft, it has deep support on .NET.
Check this tutorial (Create an OData v4 Endpoint Using ASP.NET Web API 2.2) to get more in touch with OData.
I've got a lookup field on Account entity called something. Each such Something has a reference to an account. When my users click the magnifying glass, I want them to see a list of available Something records but filtered to view only such instances that link to the currently treated entity.
Also, I'll need to design such a filtration for Contact instances to only show the Something records that are related to the account that the currently regarded contact is a member of.
I can't decide between a plugin on Retrieve and some JS in OnLoad registering a fetchXML. All such operations will be done client-side. The solution needs only to work in CRM13 (and if possible apply some cool functionality in that version).
Suggestions?
JavaScript & FetchXml are your best option here as with a Retrieve plugin you're taking the performance hit of executing on every retrieve regardless of whether the entity is being retrieved for the lookup. A filtered lookup in JS only applies for those scenarios that require a change to the field on Account.
Another other good reason for using a filtered lookup in Js is they are now a supported feature in CRM 2013 as opposed to the "hack" that was required in 2011.
Some more info on addPreSearch and addCustomFilter can be found on MSDN and there's a decent blog post providing examples here.
There appear to be two lines of APIs for adding, authenticating and aggregating sites. Depending upon which version of the Documentation/SDK set your rep started you off on, or where in the SDK Guide you started implementing from determines where you start.
Path #1 starts at
ContentServiceTraversal which allows for the retrieval of all ContentServiceInfo (by container type (such as BANK)
ItemManagementService is used to add these items
Refresh is done through RefreshService (most API not containing the word Site)
Path #2 starts at
SiteTranversalService which allows for the retrieval of all SiteInfo (no apparent support for Container Type filter)
SiteAccountManagementService is used to add these items
Refresh is done through Refreshservice (all API containing the word Site).
From the best that I can tell the aforementioned API have a lot of functionality duplication. I have noticed certain API that exist on one branch and not the other but usually they are minor changes (e.g. things you are able to filter by).
I started off with ContentServiceInfo because the documentation and samples that our rep initially gave us started there. Additionally this API started off by providing greater granularity (e.g. simply being able to filter by Container type since we were pretty much only interested in Banks and Processor sites (which I do not believe you guys support)).
My questions are:
Do the two branches of API do the exact same thing?
Do they mostly behave the same way?
Do they back-end to the exact same
System
Data store
Scraper?
Is one line of API supposed to be deprecated sooner in the future than another?
Does one line of API have more future in terms of actually adding new or augmenting existing functionality?
Site-level addition has been introduced through Yodlee APIs to overcome the fact that though a user had bank,creditcard,loan,rewards account at the same end site, user had to provide credentials for each of these containers. Site level addition APIs try to add all these containers with only 1 set of credentials. That's the only difference between container based addition and site based addition.
As to answer your questions:
Do the two branches of API do the exact same thing?
Do they mostly behave the same way?
If you mean the aggregation functionality, Yes.Except for the fact that Site level adds/refreshes all the container(bank,creditcard,loan,rewards) and Container level can add/refresh only one container per API call, all the other behavior will remain the same.
Do they back-end to the exact same
System
Data store
Scraper?
If you are referring to the Yodlee data gathering components, Yes.
Is one line of API supposed to be deprecated sooner in the future than another?
No.Both these sets of APIs cater to different needs. If you are a company who solely rely on Creditcard data, using site level addition will be overkill as it will take longer time for the aggregation and it makes more sense to use container based addition. There is also the factor of backward compatibility, which rules out deprecation of APIs.
Has anyone used Commission Junction's Product Catalog Search API for searching/fetching local deals? (BuyWithMe and KGBDeals post their deals to CJ)
There is a Yipit clone out there which uses this API. This clone was unable to categorize deals properly based on location. I was supposed to fix this issue. The problem I saw is: API's response does not contain location/city info. Therefore, deals cannot be categorized based on cities. This basically kills the purpose of local deals.
I am looking for advice from anyone who has done similar work using CJ API. May be I am missing something.
OneBigPlanet has an All-In-One API filled with all affiliate networks and daily deal providers for U.S & Canada
If you are going to use a deal aggregator API for your site/blog, you may want to take a look at this one as well.
SideBuy has recently released its version 1 API which lets the user (like yourself) connect to its comprehensive set of daily deals using several parameters to fully customize the listings. I suggest you check it out and get in touch in SideBuy's site if you need further assistance.
Disclaimer: I work for sidebuy.com.
EDIT: I've solved my issues (for now at least).
I've recently been working with the Zendesk REST Api and their use of the custom "X-On-Behalf-Of" header for looking up tickets opened by a particular user got me thinking about Restful Api design choices (in no specific language, more of a how to name URIs question). I've also read this related question on Custom HTTP headers, but it left me with more questions than answers.
Say I have an example restful web service dealing with rental apartment applications where clients use Basic Auth (keep it simple) to authenticate. Define the basic data as such:
Users (can be of type landlord or renter)
Forms (which consist of one or more Document resources and some form meta data like form name and version info)
And then some type of resource corresponding to Rental Applications, which ties together Forms, Applicants (one or more renters), Landlord, and some metadata like status and dates.
I'm struggling to properly model the URIs for the Applications resource in general, and more specifically with respect to a clients role. (assume api root is https://api.example.com/)
How do I allow a Landlord to fetch a list of applications sent to them? My intuition says make a request to "GET /applications" and Basic Auth lets the server know which user to build the list for; likewise "GET /applications" requested by a Renter would return a list of applications they've sent...but I'm not confident this is a solid design in general to mix and match sender vs. recipient lists at the same URI. Should I be thinking about the "/applications" resource differently, and perhaps allowing a hierarchy like "/applications/[USER_IDENTIFIER]" for each user instead?
Also, regardless of my applications URI design, assume a Landlord is able to create an application on behalf of a renter. Is this better accomplished by sending a custom header like "X-Create-On-Behalf-Of: somerenter#example.com" with the PUT/POST creation request? Or should my schema define a field which allows for this alternative scenario.
I'm very much an amateur at this, so I'm open to any criticism of my assumptions/design, as well as any pointers for learning more about designing RESTful api's. Thanks for reading.
I think I've found a solution.
Landlords and Renters are really just subclasses of the same object, which I'll call Party (as in party to a transaction, not birthday party). So then each one has their own resource, named like /party/PARTY_ID.
It's easy to extend this to see that /party/SOME_LANDLORD/applications and /party/SOME_RENTER/applications solve my issues. It also removes my need to consider custom headers.