Re: Uniprot Taxonomy rdfs:seeAlso vs. foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf

On 13/4/09 20:24, Peter DeVries wrote:
> I was working with OpenLink Data Explorer, and I noticed the following
> in the uniprot taxonomy records
>
> See
> http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/html/http://purl.uniprot.org/taxonomy/7162
>
> rdfs:seeAlso
>
>      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aedes
>      *
> http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Aedes_triseriatus.html
>      *
> http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=126392
> <http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=126392>
>      * http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/65/6/2661
>      * http://www.enature.com/fieldguides/detail.asp?recNum=IS0060
>      * http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~insects/sp28.htm
>      * http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~insects/sp9.htm
>      * http://www.wrbu.org/speciespages_non-ano/non-ano_a-hab/AEtri_hab.html
>      * http://zipcodezoo.com/Viruses/A/Aedes_triseriatus/
>
> Since these are not RDFa documents, should these be recast to be
> foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf ?
>
> These are web pages not RDF documents.
>
> Any others have thoughts on this?

foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf would only hold for those pages that plausibly 
have the thing as its main topic. Otherwise in FOAF we have foaf:page 
(inverse of foaf:topic...).

Also perhaps if folk here (or in the semweb lifesci group) have contact 
with the folk behind these various sites, perhaps they could be helped 
to upgrade them to use RDFa?

IMHO it is not really so bad to use rdfs:seeAlso for HTML pages, 
especially given the gradual rise of RDFa...

cheers,

Dan