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

Re: how to consume linked data

From: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 07:41:02 +0100
Message-ID: <4ABC65FE.4070702@ninebynine.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
CC: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, public-lod@w3.org
Dan Brickley wrote:
> This doc-typing idiom never got heavily used in FOAF, beyond the type
> PersonalProfileDocument, which FOAF defines. Mostly we just linked
> FOAF files together (initially with seeAlso and IFPs, lately using
> URIs more explicitly).
> 
> I think there are many other reasons why characterising typical RDF
> document patterns makes sense, related to the frustration of dealing
> with documents when all you know is "they have triples in them". We
> don't have good mechanisms for doing so yet, ie. for characterising
> these higher level patterns. But various folk are heading in same
> direction, some using SPARQL, others OWL or XForms, or DC Application
> Profile definitions....
> 
> Without some hints about what we're pointing at with our links,
> crawlers don't have much to go on. Merely knowing that the information
> at the other end of the link is "more RDF", or that it describes a
> thing of a certain type, might not be enough. There are a lot of
> things you might want to know about a person, or a place, and at many
> different levels of detail. For apps eg running in a mobile/handheld
> environment, they can't afford to speculatively download everything..

Interesting...  I'm doing work at the moment with CIDOC-CRM 
(http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/) and its expression in OWL 
(http://www8.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/IMMD8/Services/cidoc-crm/versions.html). 
  Something I've noticed is that the extension/refinement mechanism provided by 
CIDOC-CRM is based on  what they call Types (though I think it's more like 
skos:Concept), so that the core properties tend be be very predictable.  There 
are some areas where I've used new properties to capture finer-grained 
information, but they tend to be at the margins (e.g. putting numeric values on 
date-ranges) rather than in the core (e.g. this object was made in this time 
period).

Maybe there's scope for using SKOS in a doc-typing idiom?

#g
Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 07:02:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:23 UTC