W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2009

Re: Segment RDF on BBC Programmes

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 14:03:56 -0400
Message-ID: <49FF2E0C.9030504@openlinksw.com>
To: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
CC: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
Giovanni Tummarello wrote:
>> RDFa will not generally negate the essential separation of Name (via
>> URI.URN-URL) and Address (via URI.URL) since Linked Data oriented triples
>> will still contain de-referencable URIs :-)
> if you can put the RDF and the human legible HTML version in the same
> address there is absolutely no reason to have separate resources.
> If you really want to make it clear that "its not an informative
> resource" (its not like up to today we had any evidence of this being
> practically useful or enabling so far, matter of fact there are
> evidences of the contrary [1])   then just say that in the RDF
> <thisuri> <isnot> <aninformativeresource> :-)
> gone with content negotiation, gone with multiple URI URN URL and
> distinctions among them.
> I hope we can agree on the principle of keeping things absolutely as
> easy as possible, as the only way to win (back..) interest from the
> actual web development circles and have adoption
> Giovanni
> [1] http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2008/02/urls-are-people-too.html

I am absolutely game for clarity and simplicity.
So let's work on a document, or contribute to any that may be in 
development, re. injecting more RDFa into the Linked Data conversation :-)



Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Monday, 4 May 2009 18:04:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:15:56 UTC